[Sis-dtn] [EXT] RE: May CCSDS 'meeting'

Wed Apr 15 04:35:13 UTC 2020

Keith, Carlo,

I would say that routing enhancements are of interest to the community, and (more importantly), that additional SABR implementations are quite useful. There are several use-cases where the use of a "vetted" CCSDS-compliant SABR implementation which isn't tied to a given DTN stack are extremely useful, and allows vastly-simplified simulation and validation of SABR.

If the UniBo CGR implementation is fully compliant with the SABR book, then I think we should promote it as a fully-fledged prototype.

Thanks,

Jeremy

________________________________
From: SIS-DTN <sis-dtn-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> on behalf of Scott, Keith L. <kscott at mitre.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2020 9:10:32 PM
To: Carlo Caini; sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org
Cc: Scott Burleigh
Subject: Re: [Sis-dtn] [EXT] RE: May CCSDS 'meeting'

Carlo,

It might be that your SABR implementation would be generally useful to the community interested in SABR routing enhancements?  I don't know how much of a demand signal there is for that right now, but it seems like it'd be a useful tool.

I don't know what to do about things that aren’t fully releasable yet, but let's see how the schedule / list of items for 'near-term' telecons shapes up and we can either talk about these then or, if things will be releasable once the paper is out, we could defer them to sometime over the summer, perhaps?

                v/r,

                --keith

On 4/14/20, 12:23 PM, "Carlo Caini" <carlo.caini at unibo.it> wrote:

    Dear Keith,
       At Unibo we have carried out quite a lot of work on SABR enhancements since the last CCSDS meeting in Darmstadt. Nothing has been published yet (only Scott is aware of these enhancements), however I could prepare a few slides on selected topics. In particular we implemented Moderate Source Routing (to prevent loop). I submitted a paper to a conference on it, thus I could extract a few slides from the submitted paper (but the slides should be not put in the repository).
    We have also implemented from scratch an experimental version of SABR. Although, it is fully compatible with ION-3.7.0 and also the new ION-4.0.0, it does not use ION code peculiarities, such as SDR, as it is not intended to replace ION CGR, but to complement it (it is focused on testing enhancements, not deployment). I do not think that it is still of CCSDS interest to have a second SABR implemenattion, but anyway we have it now. Not offically released yet (it contains a few unpublished enhancements).
    We have also developed two ION extensions (ION-3.7.0) to record routes (one geographical, i.e. the series of DTN visited nodes, another "CGR", i.e. a series of contacts). The latter is used by Moderate Source Routing. The form,er has just been ported in ION-4. The second is going to.
    Yours,
       Carlo

    ________________________________________
    Da: SIS-DTN [sis-dtn-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] per conto di Scott, Keith L. [kscott at mitre.org]
    Inviato: martedì 14 aprile 2020 17:14
    A: sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org
    Cc: Scott Burleigh
    Oggetto: [Sis-dtn] May CCSDS 'meeting'

    Greetings folks,

    I’d like to organize a schedule for a few telecons to replace the now cancelled May meeting.

    Topics:
    Network Management

      *   Final WG review of draft Network Management Green Book.  We need to push this out and move on with Blue Book Development.  We walked through this at the last two meetings.

    SBSP Security Protocol:

      *   Finalize our schedule for WG handoff of SBSP document to SEA-SEC WG (Daniel Fischer and/or Craig Biggerstaff) for their editing.
      *   I hope at that point we’ll have enough information to start finalizing implementations.

    Implementation / Deployment Experience (DTN Interoperability)

      *   If you have material, please let me know; we can put it in CWE and discuss.

    Proposed new efforts (I suppose these are technically BoFs):

      *   LTP Revisions
         *   What changes  in light of advances and experience since initial publication (e.g. consider removing security in favor of SDLS, consider removing Green (unreliable data), …
         *   Who has resources to support?
            *   Book development
            *   Implementations
      *   BPv7 Adoption
         *   When can we start this?  Is the IETF ‘done enough’?  (I *think* so)
         *   What ‘CCSDS Extras’ to include (e.g. BIBE, DTCN, …) – there will be some work to profile the IETF BPv7 spec to CCSDS
         *   Who has resources to support?
            *   Book development
            *   Implementations
      *   Are those the right next things to work on?  We also have on the radar:
         *   Emergency Telecommand / Telemetry (first-hop / last-hop) (standardized BP application?)
         *   BP Advanced Routing (regions, multicast)
         *   BP Neighbor Discovery
         *   BP Green Book Update
         *   SSI Architecture Update

    Other proposed topics?

                                                    v/r,

                                                    --keith

    Dr. Keith Scott
    Chief Engineer, Communications Network Engineering & Analysis Dept.
    Office:    703.983.6547
    Cell:        301.437.4472
    Email:     kscott at mitre.org<mailto:kscott at mitre.org>

    The MITRE Corporation<http://www.mitre.org/>
    M/S J500
    7596 Colshire Drive
    McLean, VA 22102

    MITRE self-signs its own certificates.  Information about the MITRE PKI Certificate Chain is available from https://www.mitre.org/tech/mii/pki/

_______________________________________________
SIS-DTN mailing list
SIS-DTN at mailman.ccsds.org
https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sis-dtn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sis-dtn/attachments/20200415/6d74082e/attachment-0001.htm>