[Sis-dtn] Clean version of the CCSDS BPv7 Red Book draft

Fri May 13 11:19:55 UTC 2022

Hi Felix,

I think you raised a very valid point, i.e. to possibly restrict to scenarios that are of interest for planned or future space missions. In addition to UDPCL, I'm also wondering whether we are going to have missions planning to use BP/TCP in space. Any thoughts on it?

Tomaso

From: Felix.Flentge at esa.int <Felix.Flentge at esa.int>
Sent: Freitag, 13. Mai 2022 12:10
To: sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org
Cc: beau.t.blanding at nasa.gov; Cola, Tomaso de <Tomaso.deCola at dlr.de>
Subject: Re: [Sis-dtn] Clean version of the CCSDS BPv7 Red Book draft

Hi,

the situations regarding UDPCL is unfortunately a bit messy. We have:

1) Annex B4 in CCSDS 734.2-B-1
2) there is RfC 7122 in IRTF
3) expired UDPCL draft in IETF draft-sipos-dtn-udpcl-01 - Delay-Tolerant Networking UDP Convergence Layer Protocol (ietf.org)<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sipos-dtn-udpcl/>

In terms of BP encoding, they are basically the same (just put a bundle in UDP datagram payload, called unframed transfer in the IETF draft). 3) goes beyond that as it also includes DTLS / Keep-alive / CL-Layer fragmentation).

I think we really need to understand the 'space use cases' to make a good decision what to include (or wait for UDPCL in IETF). In general, it does not appear to me to useful in (most) space scenarios (besides testing) as at least the simple approach has some limitation (bundle sizes should be small to avoid IP fragmentation, need for explicit congestion control). I think what we should try to avoid is that we get protocol stacks like BP / UDPCL / UDP / IPE / EPP  when BP / EPP would be enough.

Regards,
Felix

From:        "Tomaso de Cola via SIS-DTN" <sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org>>
To:        <beau.t.blanding at nasa.gov<mailto:beau.t.blanding at nasa.gov>>
Cc:        sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org>
Date:        13/05/2022 09:59
Subject:        Re: [Sis-dtn] Clean version of the CCSDS BPv7 Red Book draft
Sent by:        "SIS-DTN" <sis-dtn-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sis-dtn-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>>
________________________________

Dear Beau,

Thank you for sharing the clean version. Just a few quick comments on the CLA annex:

1.        For UDPCLA, shall we point to RFC 7122?
2.        As mentioned by Felix, we should have dedicated text for EPP and SPP. Let's take also into account (probably with a note) that with the new version of SPP there exists no dedicated APID for BP or LTP. On the contrary, EPP has dedicated protocol identifiers (available also in SANA) for pointing to BP or LTP.
3.        I'm not quite sure that we can add a USLPCLA since so far (i.e. for what available in the current USLP spec), the UPID defined in USLP TFZ points only to EPP or SPP. Then BP/LTP has to be encapsulated over either of these two, but cannot go directly into USLP. If we see relevant to have direct encapsulation, I think we should pass this requirement to Greg and the SLP folks to see if they can accommodate this into a new version of USLP. After that we can have a dedicated USLPCLA, otherwise I'm afraid the BPv7 would be inconsistent with the current USLP spec in this respect.
4.        It is stated that the largest bundle over LTP cannot be more than 4GB: where does this requirement come from?

Thank you for the clarification,

Tomaso

From: SIS-DTN <sis-dtn-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sis-dtn-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org>> On Behalf Of Blanding, Beau T. (MSFC-HP27)[HOSC SERVICES CONTRACT] via SIS-DTN
Sent: Donnerstag, 12. Mai 2022 21:43
To: sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto:sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [Sis-dtn] Clean version of the CCSDS BPv7 Red Book draft

Hello all,

Attached is the clean version of the BPv7 Red Book, where most of the changes present have been accepted. I unfortunately do not have access to the google box right now, so there is one place that has not been completely cleaned up according to the edits that were made on the google box version (beginning of section 2.1). I was able to take the proper notes on everything else and apply it to the clean version.

Thank you,

Beau Blanding

HOSC Systems Engineer

MSFC 4663, Office C121

beau.t.blanding at nasa.gov<mailto:beau.t.blanding at nasa.gov>

 _______________________________________________
SIS-DTN mailing list
SIS-DTN at mailman.ccsds.org<mailto: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/20220513/4fb922f1/attachment.htm>