RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)

"Templin (US), Fred L" <> Wed, 21 October 2020 13:37 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13BC3A113D; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 06:37:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WYyMkD-mWTfu; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 06:37:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BED1B3A135F; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 06:36:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 09LDaSB4002260; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:36:28 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=boeing-s1912; t=1603287389; bh=zUxi2KEDizxAmu/QXzvlQ625tB7bMvdbz3FLTXlEh9M=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=UXJVnC4XVy194tUNBjTHXJXwQ7FrzlUCKHkP9x8bxeQv0jSfngviTv46zaX06GxWw ucZLr8ynSjTDJ/j7eUduMzTRfINunTZZUrXFOKNr2JvMgyANI1psM3eKmX0WDU6lOL sWmG+iTFuW2ds/Y8DmJduJo7oaNaQcBLNot4feAe/eYZvx6XQoh0vfjjoGWweCdVhM SQoXFoExHrYUzJGtofVzzkLxaRKh9gU5XQq6OjzmjVNavyifmisx1s5BVlBhLkdRXi svfojJyvHhdnMa1sAlbWESAgq5OGnR/ejRF9wUcfvue3aPfH1DFPGoVZcBeRZ3scfD uMfa3HeZKbBZQ==
Received: from ( []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 09LDaPmX002215 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:36:25 -0400
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.2044.4; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 06:36:24 -0700
Received: from ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5]) by ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5%2]) with mapi id 15.01.2044.004; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 06:36:24 -0700
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <>
To: Philip Homburg <>, "" <>
CC: "" <>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
Thread-Index: AdamGxsTxD3hGdlTThaXSslc4Lj72wAGYdDgACa2Ti0AEqbrsAAiyvnYAAIoG9A=
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 13:36:23 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
x-tm-snts-smtp: 8F0E648D269D4D62BC35666E39320A6BA92A576B0290630182D72EFD19AF5E062000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 13:37:50 -0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf Of Philip Homburg
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2020 5:25 AM
> To:
> Cc: Templin (US), Fred L <>om>;
> Subject: Re: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
> > So, we split the doc into
> > two parts, with everything relating to the interface moved into
> > the OMNI draft and everything pertaining to mobility left in the
> > AERO draft.  This allowed the OMNI draft to take on the form of an
> > "IPv6-over-foo" spec independently of the AERO draft. In this way,
> > the interface specification can be made to work with other mobility
> > solution alternatives than just AERO, as ICAO still has other
> > candidate mobility solutions under consideration.
> It seems to me there are two ways to read this draft:
> 1) as a part of AERO. In that case we should focus on how to minimize the
>    changes we are making. For example, it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense
>    to allocate a /10 just for communication within aviation.
> 2) As a far more general overlay network technology. But in that case, there
>    should be an archtitecture for the general case. And the draft should
>    actually focus on the general case, and have aviation specific parts in
>    other drafts.
> Currently, it seems that the draft wants to do 2) but is actually doing 1)

Thanks for this useful perspective, but please note that AERO is no way specific
to just aviation. I expect AERO to apply for any mobile networking applications,
including cars, cellphones, drones, airplanes, ships, trains and anything else that
moves and has  an onboard network or uses IPv6 multi-addressing.

That said, I think we are actually not far off from achieving your 2) above. So,
I will turn back to your previous message and treat it as comments for the
document within that spirit. I will post a response shortly.