[Sis-dtn] [EXTERNAL] BPv7 PID resolution

[Shames, Peter M (US 312B)]

Hi Keith,

I believe that there was a third aspect of this and that was providing an actual node registry and not just the existing “Agency x owns this range of node numbers”, which is what we have now.  I assumed that all of the DTN Sites offering DTN services, i.e. store and forward, would be registered in the SS&A registry.  This would include who owned them, where they are located, what services they offer, and their node numbers.  That still leaves all of the rest of the DTN Nodes that do not offer services, per se, as essentially unregistered entities, except that their assigned number would (putatively) identify the “owning” agency.

In Stage 2a, where we are, more or less, expecting node deployments to be a private matter and managed by the agency (or project), the needed info about actual identities, locations, routing, etc must be managed (privately) within the deployment.  However, in any Stage 2b context, where interoperability and the identities of nodes, and their permissions, would be a concern, I wonder if this is really adequate?

Have you guys addressed this in any way?

Thanks, Peter


From: Keith Scott <kscott at mitre.org>
Date: Monday, November 14, 2022 at 5:00 AM
To: Peter Shames <peter.m.shames at jpl.nasa.gov>, "Blanding, Beau T. (MSFC-HP27)[HOSC SERVICES CONTRACT]" <beau.t.blanding at nasa.gov>, "sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org" <sis-dtn at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] BPv7 PID resolution

Peter,

The sis-dtn wg has gone through your comments on the bpv7 draft Red Book and has proposed modifications to the document to address the issues you raised.  The high-level proposed changes to the larger issues you raised are:


  *   Include text at the end of Section 2 identifying ongoing and future work that discusses security and network management, and how security can be used to secure network management.


  *   Include in the SANA considerations section a plan to use Site Service Info records in the Service Sites and Apertures registry to provide POC information to entities wishing to connect to the BP node at a specific site.


Some issues, like the ‘late binding’ discussion probably require some discussion to resolve.

Do you have some time to start working through the PID items?  The document is here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1P8g8_2HPnadf3RfAdP6tltI4H_kwiL-p/edit?usp=share_link&ouid=112263620729744601172&rtpof=true&sd=true<https://urldefense.us/v3/__https:/docs.google.com/document/d/1P8g8_2HPnadf3RfAdP6tltI4H_kwiL-p/edit?usp=share_link&ouid=112263620729744601172&rtpof=true&sd=true__;!!PvBDto6Hs4WbVuu7!fmK28hRCJGziSKAiLWtldRMS9EO8YneHSoKu93EdeWZkVPN3SCYN5vaM29QgO89Mm8iaC6zB$> if you’d like to take a look first, or we can start by walking through them together.

                                v/r,

                                --keith

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sis-dtn/attachments/20221114/49c5352d/attachment-0001.htm>