<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3020" name=GENERATOR><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</STYLE>
<![endif]-->
<STYLE>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=790132120-08022007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>CCSDS had this bit of foresight several years ago.
IPv4 and SCPS-NP packets can both be carried natively in CCSDS data link layers,
and IPv6 packets only require a shim to support IPv6 Jumbograms. This all
works now.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=790132120-08022007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN
class=790132120-08022007> <FONT
face=Arial color=#0000ff>--keith</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> sis-csi-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org
[mailto:sis-csi-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Assi
Friedman<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, February 08, 2007 3:04 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
'Adrian J. Hooke'; 'CCSDS Cislunar Space Internetworking
WG'<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Sis-csi] RE: networking
details<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I would like to point
out that a lot of discussion needs to go into the physical/link layers of this
migration. CCSDS as-is is has its history significantly influenced from the
STDN era. This history does not make it very conducive to IP in space.
Migrating to IP will require us to address the physical/link layers. As is,
CCSDS had the foresight to acknowledge that there will be a future need to
readdress this, but the future is now present. I try to start at the side
closest to the hardware, since protocol stacks can be reloaded, hardware boxes
are much harder to reload.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Assi<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P><FONT face=Verdana color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">****************************</SPAN></FONT><FONT
color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy"> <BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana
color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> Assi Friedman
- Innoflight Inc.</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy">
<BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> 5850 Oberlin
Dr. Suite 340</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy">
<BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> San Diego, CA
92121</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy">
<BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> Tel: (858)
638-1580 X13</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy">
<BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> Fax: (858)
638-1581</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy">
<BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> Email:
afriedman@innoflight.com</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="COLOR: navy"> <BR></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana color=navy
size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">****************************</SPAN></FONT><FONT
color=navy><SPAN style="COLOR: navy"> </SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
sis-csi-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:sis-csi-bounces@mailman.ccsds.org]
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of </SPAN></B>Adrian J.
Hooke<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Thursday,
February 08, 2007 11:34 AM<BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> CCSDS Cislunar Space Internetworking
WG<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [Sis-csi] RE:
networking details</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Maybe this is a good time to take stock of where we
are. I think that it is fair to say that there is broad international
agreement that:<BR><BR>1. We can see future requirements for the emergence of
a more networked approach to space communications.<BR>2. Accordingly, we need
to develop a migration strategy that leads us towards more capable networking
protocols.<BR>3. IP has a role in that migration strategy. <BR><BR>Beyond
those elements of consensus, it's not clear that there is much agreement on
how or when to initiate change. <BR><BR><FONT color=blue><SPAN
style="COLOR: blue">At 06:09 AM 2/8/2007, Keith Hogie
wrote:<BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue"> Moving to spacecraft using
Internet protocols a change to the whole space communication
concept.</SPAN></FONT> <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>No, it's not a change to the space communication
*concept*; it's a change to the space communication *infrastructure*. If we go
there in one big bang, it will certainly change a lot of infrastructure. But
is it change for the sake of change, or change because we simply can't operate
another day in space without an all-IP
system?<BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue">Now we are changing the space end so that
selected Internet technologies and be used
end-to-end.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>Why? There are plenty of cases where selected use
of Internet technologies is beneficial *without* using them
end-to-end.<BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue">If we accept that we want and need a
routed infrastructure in space in the future, why wouldn't we want to start
putting it in place with missions currently being built.</SPAN></FONT>
<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>Well, cost ands risk *might* be among the reasons.
Why do the NASA Exploration vehicles currently being built look so much like
Apollo?<BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue">If we start launching some of our future
systems with no routed IP, is there a clean path for them to "migrate" and be
full participants in the future network. </SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>Turn that around. If we start launching *some* of
our future systems exclusively with routed IP, is there a clean path for them
to be full participants in the future international community of missions that
see no need for it?<BR><BR>Nobody's arguing that there won't be an increasing
need for portions of the international space mission support infrastructure to
adopt more powerful routing technologies. When you need IP and IP works, you
should use IP. But does that mean that *everything* has to become IP-based,
all at once? And yes, there's a migration path: it's called international
space standardization in general and in particular it's called a Virtual
Channel. It means that you can run part of your system using existing
infrastructure, in parallel with part of your system using IP-based
approaches. Change the mix of traffic on the VCs and you can migrate with
hardly any impact.<BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue">Isn't it more beneficial to take this
opportunity to deploy a whole fleet of new systems and start the first systems
with the technologies we want to end up with.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>This far out, how do you know where you will end
up? Isn't it more beneficial to take the opportunity to deploy new systems
that are based on the technologies that we use now, which already have the
built-in capability to evolve towards IP or any other future routed approach?
<BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue">Starting new missions with IP
technologies also means that they can start benefiting from the greatly
increased options for early testing between various subsystems. Systems don't
need to wait until final integration and test to start doing interoperability
tests. With IP interfaces built in, systems can start running basic
interface and functionality tests while they are still at their manufacturing
locations. This can be done years earlier than normal I&T and
find<BR>basic problems much earlier when they are easier and cheaper to fix.
</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>This claim is so sweeping that it deserves its own
discussion thread. Suffice to say that there are many people on this list who
strongly doubt that the impacts on the real world of space mission I&T are
anywhere near that rosy.<BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue">I agree that we don't need to pin down
all the details now, but we do need to have some sort of plan on how things
will roll out. </SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>We all agree with
that.<BR><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue">We may not need all the network routing
capabilities for 10 years but there seem to be lots of benefits from starting
to make use of end-to-end Internet technologies
now.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>Of course: that's why we formed this Cislunar
Space Internetworking working group. But as an international standardization
working group, it should develop a pragmatic and consensus strategy for how it
proposes to move the international space community forward. We need a clear
picture - agreed by all partners - that shows why we need to change, when we
need to change and how we need to
change.<BR><BR>///adrian<BR><BR><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P><X-SIGSEP>
<P></X-SIGSEP><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Adrian J. Hooke<BR>Chairman, CCSDS Engineering
Steering Group
(CESG)<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>