[Sis-csi] IPv4 vs. IPv6

[Keith Hogie]

There is a nice paper on the GRC Mobile Routing demos at:

http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~ivancic/papers_presentations/F1317.pdf

   It talks about their use of IPv4 and Priorty HA routing.  However,
it also mentions that in many security environments, route optimization
is not possible.

   We ran Mobile IP tests on Shuttle flight STS-107 in Jan. 2003
with Mobile routers at TDRSS and multiple NASA ground stations and
our Home Agent located in our control center at GSFC.  We were not
concerned about route optimization since we wanted our traffic to
funnel through our control center.

   In a commercial Internet scenario there are many good
reasons for looking at route optimization with millions of users
and lots of broadband access locations.  In space scnearios, I'm not
sure there are as many reasons for optimization and there are often
desires to force traffic through a few paths.

   In the shuttle tests we did not use reverse tunneling so any data
delivered to a ground station was routed directly to its destination
via an optimal path.  The Mobile IP tunnel was only used for traffic
to the shuttle.  Traffic to space vehicles has traditionally been
very low rate (a few Kbps) and optimization was not important.  That
will be changing for Cislunar scenarios.

   A Cislunar environment introduces more complex routing scenarios
that are more ad-hoc network related than just Mobile IP.  A quick
Google came up with lots of activity in both IPv4 and IPv6 MANET.
Also the DoD is getting into lots of MANET scenarios.  They are
just doing their operations around the Earth instead of the Moon.
The DoD has also mandated IPv6 for their future projects.

   So it would seem that Cislunar should consider both IPv4 and
IPv6.

Keith Hogie

Lloyd Wood wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 dfinkleman at adelphia.net wrote:
> 
> 
>> I think I hit "send" inadvertently before I was finished.  To
>> continue ..
>>
>>Prioritized home agent routing at layer 4 isn't the most efficient
>>approach to finding the nearest surrogate home agent.
>>
>>However, that's how NASA Glenn, Cisco, and DoD chose tol demonstrate
>>mobile control of satellites.
> 
> 
> Really? What's your source of information on this?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> L.
> 
> 
>>It's an IPv6 capability that's not in IPv4 as far as I know.
>>
>>Dave Finkleman
>>
>>
>>---- "Krupiarz wrote:
>>
>>>Keith,
>>>
>>>At last year's Space Internet Workshop, there was a group from Glenn
>>>that presented on this issue.  Here are the slides:
>>>
>>>http://siw.gsfc.nasa.gov/presentations-siw2004/IPv6.ppt
>>>
>>>They might be able to provide further insight on this issue.
> 
> 
> <http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><L.Wood at eim.surrey.ac.uk>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sis-CSI mailing list
> Sis-CSI at mailman.ccsds.org
> http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sis-csi


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
   Keith Hogie                   e-mail: Keith.Hogie at gsfc.nasa.gov
   Computer Sciences Corp.       office: 301-794-2999  fax: 301-794-9480
   7700 Hubble Dr.
   Lanham-Seabrook, MD 20706  USA        301-286-3203 @ NASA/Goddard
----------------------------------------------------------------------