[Sls-slp] RE: Encapsulation PIDs for DTN, LTP, etc

[Burleigh, Scott C (313B)]

More precise than “direct DTN”, I think, would be “BP”, but I agree, we’d want at least those two.  And yes, the client service ID would be used to distinguish between LTP segments that are to be delivered to a Bundle Protocol agent versus those that are to be delivered other potential LTP users.

Scott

From: Scott, Keith L. [mailto:kscott at mitre.org]
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 4:25 AM
To: Kazz, Greg J (313B); Burleigh, Scott C (313B); Hooke, Adrian J (9000)
Cc: 'sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org'
Subject: Re: Encapsulation PIDs for DTN, LTP, etc

Greg,

We've been thinking about the following:

1) DTN directly over Encap (e.g. When used over prox-1 reliable packet service.)

2) DTN over LTP over encap over (tc/tm or aos)

Thus, would it make sense to have encap pids for each (ltp and 'direct DTN') (how many ids are available)?

Scott - I'm assuming that ltp would use the Client Service ID to identify dtn vs. Other ltp users.

--keith

________________________________
From: Kazz, Greg J (313B) <greg.j.kazz at jpl.nasa.gov>
To: Scott, Keith L.; Burleigh, Scott C (313B) <scott.c.burleigh at jpl.nasa.gov>; Hooke, Adrian J (9000) <adrian.j.hooke at jpl.nasa.gov>
Cc: sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org <sls-slp at mailman.ccsds.org>
Sent: Tue Oct 27 06:58:42 2009
Subject: Encapsulation PIDs for DTN, LTP, etc
Keith et al,

SLS-SLP WG would like to know if the DTN WG needs to define Encapsulation Protocol IDs (PIDs) for LTP blocks, or DTN Bundles, or something else?
The actual value of these PIDs would go into the Space Link Identifiers Blue Book.
SLS-SLP WG is advancing the Space Link Identifiers Blue Book to a new version as a result of our meeting today.

Please let me know if you want to comment on this issue.

Thanks,

Greg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sls-slp/attachments/20091027/7c06b97a/attachment.html>