Re: [lp-wan] review of https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moskowitz-lpwan-ipnumber/

Hi Bob,

I am still puzzled on why a UA LPWAN.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 2:41 PM Robert Moskowitz <rgm-ietf@htt-consult.com>
wrote:

> Air to ground communications over a constrained wireless tech.
>
> But that would just be the 'job' of the wireless tech provider!
>
> So this doesn't cut it.

> But consider some avionics on the UA that is ethernet connected to the
> controller that has the actual wireless adapter(s).  Then for E2E, we need
> to do the SCHC above IP.
>
>
This sounds like a hypothetical scenario?

It is the use case in the draft?
>
>
Is it? Then please add some text to the draft.

Behcet

> On 7/6/22 13:13, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I quickly read the draft.
> I don't understand why UA (unmanned aircraft, or a drone?) would need
> LPWAN?
>
> Behcet
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 8:38 AM Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert=
> 40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear all
>>
>> I reviewed
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moskowitz-lpwan-ipnumber/
>>
>> Please find my comments below.
>>
>> In short, I believe that the document is useful and already well advanced
>> and I would support the adoption when times come. But I need to ensure that
>> a NH number is enough, vs. a new option that would transport SCHC
>> parameters like Rule Set ID and/or Instance ID.
>>
>> I suspect we'll make the call at IETF 114 but we need feedback by then,
>> so please join in if you wish the draft to progress rapidly.
>>
>> "
>> If the Next Header in the IP header were SCHC, not ESP, a clear
>> segregation of incoming traffic is directly supportable.
>> "
>> SCHC maintains P2P sessions (called Instances) that are associated with a
>> P2P transport. Can we have one and one only SCHC Instance over SPI? How is
>> the SCHC rule set determined?
>> In the case of SCHC over PPP,  the PPP connection indicates the session
>> one for one, and the rule set can be indicated as  URI in the
>> IPv6-Compression-Protocol Configuration option see
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-thubert-intarea-schc-over-ppp-03#section-3
>>
>> "
>> Where it is possible with ESP's SPI to mitigate inbound packet processing
>> challenges implicit SCHC would generate, DTLS header does not safely even
>> provide this and a SCHC IP number is necessary to separate traffic.
>> "
>> Is the above undoable with TLS?
>>
>> "
>> Operation starts using Veriport's WiFi service.
>> "
>> Can we avoid brand names?
>>
>> "IANA" section: The new protocol should be added to
>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-parameters/ipv6-parameters.xhtml
>> shouldn't it? And then, by ricochet it will effectively end in
>> https://www.iana.org/assignments/protocol-numbers.
>>
>> Keep safe;
>>
>> Pascal
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lp-wan mailing list
>> lp-wan@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan
>>
>
>