Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review
"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Tue, 26 August 2014 14:51 UTC
Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
X-Original-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D89041A86F9 for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:51:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.158
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.158 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HTML_ATTACH=0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id edhCRVp4VQAC for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:51:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com [130.76.32.231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB5FB1A86F8 for <dtn@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:51:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id s7QEpSbU015507; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:51:28 -0700
Received: from XCH-PHX-209.sw.nos.boeing.com (xch-phx-209.sw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.29]) by blv-mbsout-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id s7QEpMBp015392 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for <dtn@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:51:23 -0700
Received: from XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.6]) by XCH-PHX-209.sw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.9.166]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Tue, 26 Aug 2014 07:51:22 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: "dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [dtn] Draft charter for review
Thread-Index: AQHPslLWPefY9kJdR2yzzwoyo3F20ZvFRR/AgBNLH4D//8oXAP//8rNQgAC2F4CAChHp8A==
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:51:21 +0000
Message-ID: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832CFC7AD@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <D00908FA.1B55B%william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832CEC675@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAMugd_UNSfmmY+4cMcvr1p9_MRTct2NnH6xUU2dCMuCpU-LEMA@mail.gmail.com> <D0190763.1D272%william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832CF417C@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <CAMugd_USyzOCqgN5vW4tFXtFaeDeJMsmSoJP7LTWMuLmwmt3jA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMugd_USyzOCqgN5vW4tFXtFaeDeJMsmSoJP7LTWMuLmwmt3jA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_002_2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832CFC7ADXCHBLV504nwnosb_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/XGk3ZJC1RbC-fSjibDcKCerg-5c
Subject: Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review
X-BeenThere: dtn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Delay Tolerant Networking \(DTN\) discussion list at the IETF." <dtn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:51:33 -0000
Here is the latest draft charter that includes the change that was discussed for IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (diffs attached). Fred --- Draft working group charter: **************************** Working group name: Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking Working Group (DTNWG) Chair(s): TBD Area and Area Director(s): Transport Area: ADs Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf at gmail.com>, Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf at gmail.com> Responsible Area Director: Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf at gmail.com> Mailing list: General Discussion: dtn at ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/current/maillist.html Description of Working Group: The Delay/Disruption Tolerant Network Working Group (DTNWG) specifies mechanisms for data communications in the presence of long delays and/or intermittent connectivity. The work is motivated by well known limitations of standard Internet protocols that expect end-to-end connectivity between communicating endpoints, sub-second transmission delays and robust packet delivery ratios. In environments where these favorable conditions do not apply, existing mechanisms encounter problems such as reliable transport protocol handshakes timing out and routing protocols failing to converge resulting in communication failures. Furthermore, classical end-to-end security associations cannot be coordinated when communicating endpoints cannot conduct multi-message keying exchanges in a timely fashion. These limitations suggested the need for a new approach. Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN) protocols have been the subject of extensive research and development in the Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group (DTNRG) of the Internet Research Task Force since 2002. The DTNRG has developed the Delay-Tolerant Networking Architecture (RFC 4838) that the DTNWG uses as the basis for its work. The key components of this architecture are the bundle concept for encapsulating data units, the bundle transmission protocol and the underlying convergence layer architecture. The experimental DTN Bundle Protocol (RFC 5050) and Licklider Transmission Protocol (RFC 5326) have been shown to address the issues identified above in substantial fielded deployments in the space sector [1]. RFC 5050 in conjunction with TCP- and UDP-based convergence layers has been used successfully in a number of experiments both in communications challenged environments around the edges of the Internet and as an Internet overlay where applications require delay- and/or disruption-tolerance [refs needed]. The success of the BP over convergence layer protocol stack -- the core protocols of the "DTN Architecture" described in RFC 4838 -- may be attributed to the following fundamental design principles: - There is never any expectation of contemporaneous end-to-end connectivity between any two network nodes. - Because end-to-end connectivity can never be assumed, each node on the path between source and destination must be prepared to handle incoming "bundles" of data that cannot immediately be forwarded. - Again because end-to-end connectivity can never be assumed, end-to-end conversational data exchange can never be assumed to complete in a timely manner; protocol features that rely on timely conversational data exchange must therefore be excluded from the architecture or coupled with DTN-aware proxies. The DTNWG believes that protocols adhering to these principles offer opportunities for enhancing the functionality of the Internet, including - facilitating the extension of the Internet into environments such as the ocean floor and deep space in which the core Internet protocols operate sub-optimally for the reasons discussed earlier; - extending the Internet into communications challenged terrestrial environments where it is not possible to provide continuous, low delay Internet connections; and - supporting Internet use cases that need DTN capabilities. We believe that the extensive research, demonstration, and pilot operations performed to date using the DTNRG protocols provides a firm basis for publishing Internet standards derived from that work. Work items related to Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking include: o An informational "Problem Statement, Use Cases and Requirements" document - to be co-authored by industry partners with interest in progression of the working group standards-track work items. o A mechanism for the exchange of protocol data units, termed "bundles", that are designed to obviate conversational communications by containing values for all potentially relevant configuration parameters. These protocol data units are typically larger than network-layer packets. We will derive this bundle exchange mechanism from the DTN Bundle Protocol (BP) documented in RFC 5050 by publishing a new document for which [2] is a proposed first draft (where appendix A provides an extensive summary of the proposed changes to be prioritized). o A security protocol for ensuring that the network in which bundles are exchanged is secured against unauthorized access and denial of service attacks, and to ensure data integrity and confidentiality in that network where necessary. We will derive this security protocol from a "streamlined" adaptation of the DTN Bundle Security Protocol documented in RFC 6257. o An informational "DTN Advanced Features Survey" document including candidate recharter work items such as routing, IPv6-based neighbor (contact) discovery, security key management, network management, bundle-in-bundle encapsulation, reliable bundle delivery, etc. o Simple convergence layer protocols for adaptation of the bundle protocol to underlying internetworks. We expect to derive these convergence layer protocols from the Datagram Convergence protocol documented in RFC 7122 and the TCP Convergence-Layer Protocol documented in RFC 7242. o A registry for DTN Service Identifiers The working group will consider adding supplementary work items based on new information and knowledge gained while working on the initial charter, as well as to accommodate new work items beyond the scope of the initial phase. Goals and Milestones: start+0mos - Accept 'DTN Problem Statement, Use Cases and Requirements' as a working group work item intended for Informational. start+0mos - Accept 'Bundle Protocol Specification (RFC5050bis)' [2] as a working group work item intended for Proposed Standard. Start+0mos - Accept 'Streamlined Bundle Security Protocol (SBSP)' [3] as a working group work item intended for Proposed Standard. start+6mos - Working group getting concensus on changes to be implemented in RFC 5050(bis). start+6mos - Accept 'DTN Advanced Features Survey' as a working group work item intended for Informational. start+9mos - Working group getting consensus on merging RFC5050bis and SBSP into a combined draft or keep as separate drafts. start+12mos - Submit RFC5050bis and SBSP to the IESG either as a combined draft or as separate drafts. start+16mos - Submit Registry [4] and Simple Convergence Layer [5][6] as working group documents. start+20mos - Survey appropriate forums (e.g., DTNRG) for emerging technologies (e.g., convergence layer protocols, dynamic routing protocols, naming and addressing services, etc.) ready for transition into IETF DTN Working Group. Publish draft on survey results as independent submission related to the WG. start+20mos - Submit Registry and Simple Convergence Layer to IESG start+24mos - Recharter to accommodate new work items or close Working Group [1] "BP/LTP deployment on EPOXI spacecraft" [2008], http://committees.comsoc.org/tccc/ccw/2010/slides/DINET_CCW.pdf [2] "Proposed Revised Bundle Protocol" [2014], https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-burleigh-bpv7/ [3] "Streamlined Bundle Security Protocol Specification" [2014], https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-dtnrg-sbsp/ [4] "Delay-Tolerant Networking Bundle Protocol IANA Registries" [2011], https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6255/ [5] "Datagram Convergence Layers ..." [2014], https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7122/ [6] "TCP Convergence-Layer Protocol..." [2014], https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7242/
- [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Sebastian Schildt
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Joerg Ott
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Burleigh, Scott C (312G)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Burleigh, Scott C (312G)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Wesley Eddy
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Burleigh, Scott C (312G)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review William Immerman
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Clark, Gilbert
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review l.wood
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Burleigh, Scott C (312G)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Stephen Farrell
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Avri Doria
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Brian Haberman
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Burleigh, Scott C (312G)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review l.wood
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review l.wood
- [dtn] Draft Charter Update Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Nabil Benamar
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0)
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Nabil Benamar
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Wesley Eddy
- Re: [dtn] Draft charter for review Templin, Fred L