Re: [dtn] DTN URI structure and patterns

Loiseau lucien <loiseau.lucien@gmail.com> Wed, 10 June 2020 01:47 UTC

Return-Path: <loiseau.lucien@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BCE83A0D9C for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 18:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.844
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.844 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NUMERIC_HTTP_ADDR=1.242, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FREEMAIL_DOC_PDF=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 tA6ooCbw7PgC for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 18:46:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf33.google.com (mail-qv1-xf33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE9E93A0D94 for <dtn@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2020 18:46:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf33.google.com with SMTP id x16so356314qvr.3 for <dtn@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Jun 2020 18:46:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WVEhwgh3q0LfA+BBovTclKL6GXawOpGCsaN4+NSdU/Q=; b=WURwkrRoSMVaiEZkbEkYGgxq4fr5d8SloBWT0wle6alPfO3zsWxQy98ZR5v1lNncEg ji9S7PEi9o8STsS3lK5Qy2xMoGq5Y87gjbmiJrhEwWdQgx3t08VF5CEJmyTJkNWlpaUi yv829aXqIVjZRG8+KJpECED2GsXik+Zd8a6vtBh3CIDUGB8QdNFXNOEHKhhRP11X/XGX bq3ovHsvl3Id5kh6PBSen/z6bEYoDXMyGauYRn1EyX135/kmQa5Zuzv0dO9+A43BlwEh Mp5iL3dZnMtzyNZFNiBhqD8V/X9DZU00LjUQ0FjHh/239nlVfwFEXzUvsS4egQL1a9Pc bI3g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WVEhwgh3q0LfA+BBovTclKL6GXawOpGCsaN4+NSdU/Q=; b=leGglSonZhXGgdj+DSCJ09oXdyf7ZrOyObARvozFq8TmssZR70iznOBCAJ5wDa+cn4 lmg1v3tiOc1hg1g4WXLJwo4kBTdSlUfU2qgbjOBpIvWax3PDXEW5VNcccibW4UXfxyYs Si8U84FGuoGBy8L+7oxbsMuyqYTeAYb3eK3iYrXmMgTv9roO+bjIdxiffnyKhtrBJkLB DpCwbFuMPADjUQYyvDOoxXWuHiiOIVCXdwkoPJ+R2/1Ta+rqJw/aMs5dsB3Qb6tfJego 0tJS6TPR0bLYDkTkKzbqZZRlbuFUqtZCuCSnfRFMguZxoTnCSX+ezze6oT1FgBGOysEk 9MEQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533p3twPhSbHXWKCOkJ7NjHsMUxfa/+GuDtfUm0t/MyNbqbun5vR 0uufUd/PH7m+9MqDomO+xz/+QMjQVO6ON9zP+Mo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwDZyb0qTDdwmr8764CV0MzYG3U/fwN9HpnDmt5GvqlMs/tcR/21Np/magCEibQue5kiZVw+11Gtzeg/+vK6Z8=
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:b712:: with SMTP id t18mr944675qvd.245.1591753617745; Tue, 09 Jun 2020 18:46:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CH2PR13MB3575C420FCF4E0F0D60363E79F820@CH2PR13MB3575.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR13MB3575C420FCF4E0F0D60363E79F820@CH2PR13MB3575.namprd13.prod.outlook.com>
From: Loiseau lucien <loiseau.lucien@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 09:46:46 +0800
Message-ID: <CANoKrvbVkXr4HTNR2HURgVF16pbx-xiPyjwofZ1hWa5yr_cO5A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Brian Sipos <BSipos@rkf-eng.com>
Cc: "dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="000000000000f4e3a005a7b10406"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/XePr8hLiJMc-1Apf3HDxvvQIOLI>
Subject: Re: [dtn] DTN URI structure and patterns
X-BeenThere: dtn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 01:47:03 -0000

Hi,

I authored a draft last year to start the discussion on the topic of
DTN-URI:

https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-loiseau-dtn-cla-eid-00.html

Afaik wildcarding and other DTN-scheme specifics are all implementation
dependant and that is why I thought that at the very least, each
convergence layer adapter (cla) should be mapped to a specific EID scheme
"cla".
By doing so, we would at least have a way to reliably identify link-local
nodes over which we can later build more complicated routing scheme.

I have also made an implementation of BPBIs called Terra:

https://github.com/Marlinski/Terra

In this implementation, a bundle node can have multiple EIDs and each
application would simply register the path portion of the URI.
For instance let's assume that a node has a "simple tcp" convergence layer
adapter on two IP interfaces (10.0.0.1 and 192.168.0.12) and an application
layer echo service.
In that case in Terra:

   - this bundle node would be identified over iface1 with the EID cla:stcp:
   10.0.0.1:1234
   - and over iface2 with the EID cla:stcp:192.168.0.12:1234
   - the echo service would register the path /echo/

and so you could send bundle to the echo service either through iface1
using the full dtn uri cla:stcp:10.0.0.1:1234/echo/ or through iface2 with
cla:stcp:192.168.0.12:1234/echo/
Of course this is only valid for the cla scheme. Any other dtn-scheme would
have its own semantic.

There is also an old document written by Keith Scott from 2008 that dig a
little bit more in DTN naming but I think it is mostly informational
(I joined the document to this email because the original link has become
401
https://cwe.ccsds.org/sis/docs/SIS-DTN/Other%20Documents/DTN%20Naming%20and%20Addressing3.docx
)


On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 5:20 AM Brian Sipos <BSipos@rkf-eng.com> wrote:

> All,
> In RFC4838 [1] there is mention of the potential to "provision for
> wildcarding some portion of an EID" but none of the DTN-scheme URIs that
> I've come across or the structure in BPbis [2] really indicate what
> wildcarding would look like or how it would operate.
> Is wildcarding currently in use for DTN-scheme URIs?
> What exactly would the wildcard cover; a portion of the "node-name" or
> "demux" part, or both, or something else?
>
> It's also not clear what the expected "node-name" structure of a
> DTN-scheme URI is supposed to look like or behave like. I've seen some
> examples with pseduo-domain-names used for node names, but are these
> actually structured names or just opaque "1*VHCAR" as [2] indicates?
> Are node names "one.net" and "two.net" in any way related? Do existing
> tools use some relationships like these?
>
> These questions are coming up as a result of looking at what PKIX on a DTN
> would look like and trying to head off some struggles which have already
> caused lots of pain in PKIX for DNS names [3].
>
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4838#section-3.3
> [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis-24#section-10.7
> [3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6125#section-7.2
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dtn mailing list
> dtn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn
>


-- 
--
Lucien Loiseau