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

Bob Hinden <> Sat, 17 October 2020 16:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 656213A109B; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 09:47:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ek7AgQQIP8Yg; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 09:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92F6D3A109A; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 09:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id e23so6375490wme.2; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 09:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=5CKNmsJ4TzXu85yCFWudPRr+jIAeaRHnj1JzyPxk8wg=; b=BYzc7DeDeqfavJIlIdCU00f/yDbhbVpNmqm9jtBsG8n+Nd2gcKI8ZZjyjgqKAwZTCs FNBVRl/HtbCFHgo4tPCYq4ExEmlyGDA3KLS7DXvVS16i2wJpK9XFuOk6Hp5RCamEP6vq 7JuUk6K2eD6RwT5LNz9Ol0PcJmcjZd4iIY7TMT0nqboeraVbOIi7Kjm5Rk8MTaxOEZ0a y4/YePphMH5QnPxzfERbCipkuGfc31uRkibVUvzzqU5eBfM071Xf1NNVCAxAYsrzNeJN Sm7JymttGqFdWHsw5lGAj/FwYlOUxN5wdMi1sy3R+LJcp0zYFNvqcj2e2WSeL0mM1ot9 Qmmg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=5CKNmsJ4TzXu85yCFWudPRr+jIAeaRHnj1JzyPxk8wg=; b=nZjCxoQeG+ABah2au1V4Vuh6ijOv2JGLBukf30x5KZiLHAo7MN3C6EK3OMGHkRguCu +bPIw22sJB6x41RyLG+qnqgBKQgyXEWCqZoXtW4FchQ6ZZkfuFfp/NvJeqUzJCQ+vArH Q30OLRvKEnfwH0QVmIgZgWmfYh9/PdcPFvJ2f8Yk6/nY2Tw2nCYgg0XEUz6GL9T7dc/v ElD6UCUwNP+MCGRD3noijqg0U7BNd1lEXjnFCH40g17zgzETtgi9yk53updwz/saQOJ1 kHFDYSVEYbSUbnmsjbFpCeWRjMX0/rsxVuMQlrQdVBVnP8Htwg4FMTsBPxB0Q8FKqhxO wTpQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530AdlVYwqqqXFAHJudA82VubV3uFMfCu3C+RunUS2YFnlpmgOb5 l6pICkGisyQ9JhHJXMpPg8U=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyH8WyBEeeQ3oxHpzZT1U3dgdBuzLGUPNAsDPdO9O9k7jiCaP02OaTeGVKDUAX73eXtg5HgOg==
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c0c8:: with SMTP id s8mr8967482wmh.78.1602953251978; Sat, 17 Oct 2020 09:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:8c25:bc1:6706:fa4a? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:8c25:bc1:6706:fa4a]) by with ESMTPSA id u5sm10039026wru.63.2020. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 17 Oct 2020 09:47:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7780C1B9-FD4D-4D92-9FB5-77D380CFC91F"; 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 09:47:25 -0700
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: Bob Hinden <>, "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <>, IPv6 List <>, =?utf-8?Q?Ole_Tr=C3=B8an?= <>, "" <>
To: "Templin (US), Fred L" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17)
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: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 16:47:36 -0000


> On Oct 17, 2020, at 9:01 AM, Templin (US), Fred L <> 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.

> 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?  This is far beyond what was I understood was called for in the OMNI liaison letter ( ) 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.


> Thanks - Fred
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: atn [] On Behalf Of Bob Hinden
>> Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2020 8:52 AM
>> To: Manfredi (US), Albert E <>
>> Cc: IPv6 List <>rg>; Ole Trøan <>rg>; Bob Hinden <>om>;
>> 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 <> wrote:
>>> From: ipv6 <> 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