Re: [dtn] [dtn-interest] DTN static routing

Dear Nabil

For me it makes no sense to talk about static routing when we are talking about networks that should be able exploit any forwarding opportunistic to overcome the problem of facing intermittent Internet connectivity. If you’re talking about Delay-tolerant Networks as in transmissions over long delay links, it makes no sense to talk about routing at all, since the problem is more a reliable transport problem. On the other hand if you are talking about Disruptive-tolerant Networks, then you need dynamic routing to overcome the intermittent connectivity, implementing a store-carry-forward algorithm.

What chairs are you referring to? It should be from the new DTNWG and not from DTNRG. To the best of my knowledge there were presented at least two routing proposals to DTNRG. One is Prophet, which is now RFC6693, and the other is dLife (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moreira-dlife/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moreira-dlife/> ). dLife last version is the fourth one. In the meantime, due to lack of feedback, we didn’t releases version 5 in the DTNRG. Currently dLife is being exploited in the European project UMOBILE (http://www.umobile-project.eu <http://www.umobile-project.eu/>).

Paulo

> On 22 Apr 2015, at 15:18, Nabil Benamar <benamar73@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Thank you for your insights and comments!
> In fact, I have suggested during the DTN session in Dallas why not to work on Dynamic routing instead of static routing. I got an answer from the chairs that we don't know which routing protocols could be considered !! And this is the reason that pushed John and I to volunteer for static with the intention to provide a document (short or detailed ) on the aspect !
> 
> We do static routing in some cases even if Dynamic routing is available. It's the case when one wants a stable path (through a firewall) for the packets.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0) <william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov <mailto:william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov>> wrote:
> In line.
> 
> On 4/22/15 8:37 AM, "Greg Troxel" <gdt@ir.bbn.com <mailto:gdt@ir.bbn.com>> wrote:
> 
> >
> >"Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0)" <william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov <mailto:william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov>> writes:
> >
> >> My understanding is Static mean hard wired.  You know what, where and
> >>when
> >> - similar to IP static routing where you know what and where.  No
> >>protocol
> >> is involved.  It is simply configuration.  You propagate the forwarding
> >> table.
> >>
> >> If I recall correctly, static routes usually get preference over dynamic
> >> routes.
> >
> >That makes sense.  I wonder then what it means to work on it
> 
> Me too.
> 
> >- to fix up
> >the reference implementation so that it has equivalents to "netstat -r",
> >"route add", etc.?  Or to write a document giving guidance to people
> >deciding which static routes to add?   Or ?
> 
> 
> I guess one thing would be to state whether or not the "when" is required.
> 
> 
> A second is to state whether "Static" or "Dynamic" has precedence.
> Actually, I prefer dynamic if it is available. If you are doing Static
> routing, it is because you do not have Dynamic routing. Static tends to
> get you in trouble.  We may think we know all, but we usually don't.
> 
> I think this should be a very short document.  Maybe it could actually be
> incorporated into 5050bis or some other document that states default
> assumptions.
> 
> Will
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> 
> 
> nabilbenamar.ipv6-lab.net <http://nabilbenamar.ipv6-lab.net/>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dtn-interest mailing list
> dtn-interest@irtf.org <mailto:dtn-interest@irtf.org>
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest>
Melhores Cumprimentos/Best Regards/Mit Freundlichen Gruessen
Paulo Mendes
------------------------------------------------------------
Paulo Mendes, Ph.D
Vice-director of the Research Unit in Cognition and People Centric Computing (COPELABS)
Director of the Ph.D program on Informatics - New Media and Pervasive Systems (NEMPS)
Associated Professor at University Lusofona, Portugal

http://copelabs.ulusofona.pt/~pmendes
Tel.: +351 217 50 50 22