Re: [Tm-rid] Review of draft-drip-arch-02 w.r.t. RFC6973, RFC8280 and other

[Amelia Andersdotter <[e-mail]>]

On 2020-07-07 17:15, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>
>
> On 7/7/20 10:36 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:
>
>> There could be two domainnames in an onboard network of a flying taxi:
>> one dedicated to the hosts on the onboard safety network and one for the
>>  hosts on the entertainment network, for the traveller's smartphone
>> wifi.
>
> UAM provides some other interesting considerations.  I suspect that a
> UAM will still be required to Broadcast Remote ID messages.  In theory
> it could have 2 radios sending out different set of messages with
> different MAC addresses (Note that many Brd-RID messages do NOT have
> the Remote ID, the receiver MUST be able to correlate messages to RID
> based on MAC).
>
 there is upstarting work on MAC identifier
replacements:
https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/20/11-20-0742-01-0rcm-proposed-par-draft.docx


which might be interesting if this is something that is going to present
architectural or other concerns in this group. or perhaps to talk about the work of this group in the ietf-ieee coordination group at least.


>>
>> When that is so, one would still want one domainname to be advertised to
>> the outside, like there is just one text painted on the outside.
>>
>> This makes me wonder if it would not be easier to just take that
>> conventional name painted on the outside frame and encode it in an
>> identifier, and why not putting it in an IPv6 address.
>
> CAAs REQUIRE a tail number for all commercial and almost all civil
> aircraft to be displayed clearly.  For your hobby drone, you are
> expected to register it with the FAA (or EASA in EU) and be assigned a
> tail number.
>
I'm assuming that registration of hobby drones (or other aerial
vehicles) will occur with national or at least regional CAAs in the
European area, and that EASA will not perform a stronger function than
coordinating the federated architecture for registries that are thus set
up - at least in so far as they do not contain information that is
deemed sensitive by the national or regional CAAs (or other entities) in
question.

This is why the U-space documents emphasize federation and modularity a
lot, and perhaps why something like DNS tech could be interesting (I
imagine).

best regards,

Amelia