RE: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)

"Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Mon, 19 October 2020 13:29 UTC

Return-Path: <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.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 95E183A0991; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 06:29:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=boeing.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 4tDW71h70ncy; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 06:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net [130.76.144.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF4EC3A098B; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 06:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id 09JDTiAU022139; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:29:45 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=boeing.com; s=boeing-s1912; t=1603114185; bh=QXsRDIbmemr/j2Tf52HKclNUZz11luYP3Bvcu47TMwA=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:From; b=qX6dIDpYYxvovzaBUodSKDuWcCnpioerP6wRndvj7rZuOlnov9V/hWjjPxAVqma1M +4C8JzBZ3h8j0ENODhdnt37m91bfPKVEq1qD8ss/5WCMlKCTlfbiwl5TipzItpvDx3 Bh9aQSdcwAwnFDkeCfviAb6oU+pdHCPEaQn24AWz+a3d9rX5YlUjbLtGG6TFHYwvWO c2q56hhZ+qJGEvOt3QkoJfekGVlp9SQnCGsQcxPtLba5GC8ExiEWGTSfwBE6lIUoyz kA9ey0TMTopH/3mZi+TBTJi75Lzjs07wNVveGBHg5tMoeGfM7ow0zfKy16B9m8mShw SBQtVG9hdqPCA==
Received: from XCH16-01-09.nos.boeing.com (xch16-01-09.nos.boeing.com [144.115.65.234]) by clt-mbsout-01.mbs.boeing.net (8.15.2/8.15.2/8.15.2/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTPS id 09JDTaaJ021049 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:29:36 -0400
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com (144.115.66.112) by XCH16-01-09.nos.boeing.com (144.115.65.234) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.1.2044.4; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 06:29:34 -0700
Received: from XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5]) by XCH16-07-10.nos.boeing.com ([fe80::1522:f068:5766:53b5%2]) with mapi id 15.01.2044.004; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 06:29:34 -0700
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
CC: "Manfredi (US), Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@boeing.com>, IPv6 List <ipv6@ietf.org>, =?utf-8?B?T2xlIFRyw7hhbg==?= <otroan@employees.org>, "atn@ietf.org" <atn@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
Thread-Topic: Embedding IP information in an IPv6 address (OMNI)
Thread-Index: AdamGxsTxD3hGdlTThaXSslc4Lj72w==
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:29:34 +0000
Message-ID: <093fce506718470bb147e2eefbf02b42@boeing.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [137.137.12.6]
x-tm-snts-smtp: AF8875D1C1BDA5B4F8E01908E72836CA73FA1955059507AF52FB7C377784F48B2000:8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/yDGmOPfz2TqTG4brWqW6W5RH_i8>
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: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 13:29:50 -0000

HI Bob,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hinden@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2020 4:02 PM
> 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 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.

OMNI Is a good reason to re-instate SLAs. OMNI will also want to use ULAs, but for
other and non-overlapping purposes.

> >>> 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.

True that the OMNI draft does not yet reference ipwave (will fix in the next version).
But, draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking heavily cites OMNI.

> >> 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.

Let me know what I can do to make it more clear.

Thanks - Fred

> 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
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >