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

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Sat, 17 October 2020 23:02 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCC653A0115; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 G8yWDIQU-pbd; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x344.google.com (mail-wm1-x344.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::344]) (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 BD5303A0114; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x344.google.com with SMTP id 13so6839092wmf.0; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=gNUjzG1qmax1OHgwMIiUO+5jahm3ftcvHCRNUGBnlTU=; b=HVtfEvPt5miGgLFHVV88GSCHbrNp9+qeawO4omMPg0DM2Y7/s2zLkzrKUJzAy5UkKV 2zcZrBImvStuZlPr1fqPOg6fjvl3x77TdYBMkkOsdqijMIQ3gRM7XvzBrAfcbT8AiV9H dwqO6Qd3SSc7Ulq6usinwxxZfKLkUWmsdoYgmlo741kqwrDyDc1J9PwIlfvpsGArrMak 5JZc9np0MAceI6MovCO9sANxJHx87Tx4NEQkTB7dlvsOHQJ2hNJX6WlWVPju0N0MmRyM uQjfMrreYM2vegxRgsJ5H1+DNqGFMradtX6V37v5gwYrNu2LZHUprrv4qZ0yh1YJpn/R wOag==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=gNUjzG1qmax1OHgwMIiUO+5jahm3ftcvHCRNUGBnlTU=; b=cF5bvL/QzWNfbeBPgmIrZY91N+QBnuC1G+0nU/vqtaz9kWyGpBWbHbJxEyIOmPblP3 59o7QyQpS/OaN5Kyuw4j1dVM4q4fnhEl2/VJ9Hzz7D2M2If1mx2cF3HakP0B81SLo3Rb jLnlOoJ7UwEp/TQh96SFdyn7KL7+537Er9gCl3YIf31VoHMcSpG/xupQS11FGzh1RiYZ mA3UjuNCrkOfVfDF36P+qJ4XgeGxNPPeUYkN4NKlGrTRNy5wLENSyhmEi4Hxpn9MPSTJ BvA+qC30627h0UNyPOzGLaa75vfW0OE1g7KL3Nj6Avz1vfiEJWbVB8acCfhZZ+AT21k8 VacQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532kcxhxWAAH3mV2CWE51LYVdaTr3mWHqd7AWolApKHiC8AjZJyh TKoejdcAWO84m4wTaZa81uQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzzlan7Z+/52WoWAvMBKsdj0JgOZtUKDS8oDxQvbUgtPNq/qhaNzqGgz99YQ6kF3mdUYN0oVQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c4cb:: with SMTP id g11mr10303536wmk.88.1602975745770; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:8c25:bc1:6706:fa4a? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:8c25:bc1:6706:fa4a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a17sm10986255wra.29.2020.10.17.16.02.23 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:02:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <4E09A4FD-89F5-49D1-B6AC-1689E0789757@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C9CF60AF-494D-41C3-A4D6-895537FA318D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.17\))
Subject: Re: [atn] [EXTERNAL] Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:02:17 -0700
In-Reply-To: <1b205cd1ec3f4602b12b178a1c769944@boeing.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, =?utf-8?Q?Ole_Tr=C3=B8an?= <otroan@employees.org>, "atn@ietf.org" <atn@ietf.org>
To: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
References: <81c2b0adda744231ae790408dcb594a2@boeing.com> <C38A7B84-6451-42C3-925D-09BEDBA319AD@employees.org> <053deb1bf9c149df98ad3e75d60bfe93@boeing.com> <312E6A75-75D7-409D-85FB-6ACCBA2474F3@gmail.com> <49d4846dc5cf43e8921fe02d63810437@boeing.com> <43BBB7E0-3E55-4F6A-A49B-54AB0BB760FA@gmail.com> <1b205cd1ec3f4602b12b178a1c769944@boeing.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/YG8afGtqir_wItmUn36AJhT6ioQ>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:02:30 -0000

Fred,

> On Oct 17, 2020, at 10:00 AM, Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Bob,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hinden@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2020 9:47 AM
>> To: Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
>> Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>om>; Manfredi (US), Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>om>; IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>rg>; Ole
>> Trøan <otroan@employees.org>rg>; atn@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [atn] [EXTERNAL] Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
>> 
>> Fred,
>> 
>>> On Oct 17, 2020, at 9:01 AM, Templin (US), Fred L <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Bob, it looks like our notes crossed at approximately the same time, but I would say
>>> the same thing to you that I just said to Bert - we will want all four of LLAs (for the
>>> control plane), SLAs (for the OAL) and ULAs/GUAs (for end-system addressing).
>> 
>> I think we are saying you are asking for too much.
> 
> The ask is to bring SLAs off mothballs and back into service - it would be a good use
> of an otherwise wasted space.

There are very good reasons why SLA were deprecated, I don’t see a reason to change that.  ULAs are intended to replace the use of SLAs.

> 
>>> About your scale calculations, there will be far more terrestrial vehicles, urban
>>> air mobility vehicles, drones, pedestrians etc. than there are the number of
>>> aircraft currently worldwide. But, scale is just one dimension of the problem
>>> space and the more important dimension is *function*.
>> 
>> Where is the problem statement for this?
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking/

That is interesting, but I don’t see any references to that in the omni draft, or any mention at all of ipwave.   Nor does the ipwave document reference your omni draft.

> 
>> This is far beyond what was I understood was called for in the OMNI liaison letter
>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1676/ ) that we thought the OMNI draft was focused on.  The liaison letter talks about aircraft, not
>> vehicles, drones, pedestrians, etc.
>> 
>> I read what you are saying is a mobility solution for everything.
> 
> What we have been designing for the aircraft domain appears to be a good fit
> for other mobility domains as well, with the above draft as evidence. I believe
> we can satisfy the aircraft in the near term while still allowing for more
> general-purpose mobility applicability.

That is far from clear to me.   To me you have a solution, that changes a lot of things in IPv6, and you are claiming it solves all IP mobility problems.   Please excuse my skepticism, I can’t even tell if it solves the aircraft domain.

Bob


> 
> Thanks - Fred
> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks - Fred
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: atn [mailto:atn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bob Hinden
>>>> Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2020 8:52 AM
>>>> To: Manfredi (US), Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>
>>>> Cc: IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>rg>; Ole Trøan <otroan@employees.org>rg>; Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>om>; atn@ietf.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [atn] [EXTERNAL] Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
>>>> 
>>>> Bert,
>>>> 
>>>>> On Oct 16, 2020, at 2:47 PM, Manfredi (US), Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> From: ipv6 <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Ole Troan
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I would challenge you to make OMNI entirely free from semantic addresses. That would also help the working group understand
>>>> what benefits semantic addresses bring to OMNI. And what the tradeoffs would be.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think it's a matter of speed and simplicity, no? You avoid that extra protocol, to assign addresses. Same idea as embedding the
>> MAC
>>>> into the IPv6 address. But it's true that the IETF likes to stay away from semantic addresses.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The path of least resistance, from all the back and forth, as of now, seems to be to either use ULAs, or to request a new /10 for
>> this
>>>> new purpose.
>>>> 
>>>> I did some searching, found that there are currently about 500K aircraft of all types (general aviation, commercial, military, etc.).
>>>> Allocating a /10 seems excessive to me for this even with a lot of growth.
>>>> 
>>>> Using ULAs would be fine.   This might even be a good justification to use the other half of the ULA space as I suspect the ICAO
>> could
>>>> be an allocation authority.
>>>> 
>>>> Bob
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>