Subject: [manet] New FCC Regulation

From: DANIEL BYRNE <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:43:38 -0600

Would a manet be practical on an airplane in flight?  Now that the FCC
allows wireless networks to operate on airplanes in flight, what would be
the method by which the plane connects to the ground communications towers
or to the sattelites?  A MANET approach would allow the plane to shift
gateway routers as it passes over different geographic regions.  Also
individual users on the plane can contribute in a ad-hoc manner with one
another, sharing files, movies, chatting, etc. What physical layer, long
haul, wireless technologies can be used to communicate with the sattelites
and towers?

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

---

From: "Wujciak, James (US SSA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:08:41 -0500

The routing protocol (level 3) should not have issues with "safety of
flight". The frequencies and power (level 2 & 1) used should not
interfere with the flight systems. Now if flight critical information is
to be sent through a manet network, it the would have to D0-178B (FAA)
compliant.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of DANIEL BYRNE
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 2:44 PM
To: MANET Newsgroup
Subject: [manet] New FCC Regulation

Would a manet be practical on an airplane in flight?  Now that the FCC
allows wireless networks to operate on airplanes in flight, what would
be
the method by which the plane connects to the ground communications
towers
or to the sattelites?  A MANET approach would allow the plane to shift
gateway routers as it passes over different geographic regions.  Also
individual users on the plane can contribute in a ad-hoc manner with one
another, sharing files, movies, chatting, etc. What physical layer, long
haul, wireless technologies can be used to communicate with the
sattelites
and towers?

---

From: DANIEL BYRNE <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:54:59 -0600

Volatility is indeed possible inside the airplane as different people log
onto and off of the network and move around the plane.  MANET would be
beneficial in reducing the load on the central access point for node to node
communications.  On the WAN port, while it might not change routing
topologies, it certainly can and will on a # of transcontinental flights.
Why not have a MANET in place handling this low frequency volatility?

-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Buddenberg [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 3:42 PM
To: DANIEL BYRNE
Cc: 'Wujciak, James (US SSA)'; MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

For this kind of app, MANET has little applicability or value added.

Inside aircraft. MANET is designed to handle network topology
volatility.  That volatility will certainly not occur inside the
aircraft.  Even if you shift back and forth from one AP to another, that
doesn't entail changing routing tables.  

Outside aircraft -- the radio-WAN.  While aircraft are obviously mobile
platforms, that doesn't always translate into either layer 2 or layer 3
mobility issues -- it's entirely possible for an aircraft to take off
and fly to a destination and never change routing topology at all (e.g.
remains under the same satellite footprint for the entire flight).  

On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 12:31, DANIEL BYRNE wrote:
> I'm just interrested in hte prospect of web browsing capabilites for
airline
> passengers.
> From: Wujciak, James (US SSA) [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 2:09 PM
> To: MANET Newsgroup
> Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation
> 
> 
-- 

b

---

From: "Frye, Robert J (US SSA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 19:37:15 -0500

This is more of NEMO than MANET, and the Access Point running in
infrastructure mode means it is not an Ad-Hoc network, even tho the
end-user nodes come & go.  The only added capability MANET could provide
would be either the airplane-airplane discovery & in-flight transfer
(likely NOT what most people would want!), or intra-airplane moving
around between different sections of the aircraft with multiple APs on
board and nodes (PDAs, laptops, ...) remaining active while traveling.
For the latter, it's more likely that the airline would put a single AP
approximately mid-body to serve passengers the length of the craft.

Rob Frye
BAE SYSTEMS
CNIR
11487 Sunset Hills Road
Reston, VA 20190
(v)703-668-4520
(m)571-331-2846
(e)[email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of DANIEL BYRNE
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 5:19 PM
To: MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

MANETs on planes also open up the possibility of plane to plane
communication between passengers on passing airlines without the need of
an
intervening satellite.

-----Original Message-----
From: DANIEL BYRNE [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 3:55 PM
To: MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

Volatility is indeed possible inside the airplane as different people
log
onto and off of the network and move around the plane.  MANET would be
beneficial in reducing the load on the central access point for node to
node
communications.  On the WAN port, while it might not change routing
topologies, it certainly can and will on a # of transcontinental
flights.
Why not have a MANET in place handling this low frequency volatility?

-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Buddenberg [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 3:42 PM
To: DANIEL BYRNE
Cc: 'Wujciak, James (US SSA)'; MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

airline
-- 

b

---

From: DANIEL BYRNE <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:33:58 -0600

What's a NEMO?

-----Original Message-----
From: Frye, Robert J (US SSA) [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 6:37 PM
To: DANIEL BYRNE; MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

Rob Frye
BAE SYSTEMS
CNIR
11487 Sunset Hills Road
Reston, VA 20190
(v)703-668-4520
(m)571-331-2846

-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Buddenberg [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 3:42 PM
To: DANIEL BYRNE
Cc: 'Wujciak, James (US SSA)'; MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

airline
-- 

b

---

From: DANIEL BYRNE <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 09:34:39 -0600

While air traffic management might be more "important", consumer
applications drive the market and drive change.  Air traffic management will
never change to an ad-hoc  system unless the rest of the world is using
ad-hoc systems to begin with.  Government implementation of new technology
is very slow unless it addresss a national secruity issue.  Also  half-baked
ideas, seat of the pants type stuff are often the ideas that change the
world.  Often it is intuition that guides revalation and new avenues of
thought.  While commercial Ad-Hoc implementations might not be "important",
once the seed of thought is out their it often inspires more creative
thought in other areas.  That spread of creativity cannont happen if ideas
are kept silent for fear of denegrating character attacks, worries about
"importance" or other such inconsequential concerns.  A newsgroup thus is
the perfect place to seed new ideas so that the idea may spread through a
community of like minded individuals.

-----Original Message-----
From: Wesley Eddy [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 8:50 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [manet] New FCC Regulation

Instead of the various half-baked ideas of tenous usefulness floating
around this list, folks might want to look at some interesting work that
has already been done on applying ad hoc networking in a flight
environment:

Maggie X. Cheng and Yiyuan J. Zhao.  "Connectivity of Ad Hoc Networks for
Advanced Air Traffic Management". Journal of Aerospace Computing,
Information,
and Communication, volume 1, May 2004.

This can be found in the electronic library at the www.aiaa.org website.
The focus is on air traffic management, which is a much different (and
more important) beast than providing user services.

-Wes

---

From: "Frye, Robert J (US SSA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2004 17:23:33 -0500

NEMO = NEtwork MObility.  See
<http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/nemo-charter.html> and
<http://www.mobilenetworks.org/nemo/>.

Rob Frye
BAE SYSTEMS
CNIR
11487 Sunset Hills Road
Reston, VA 20190
(v)703-668-4520
(m)571-331-2846

-----Original Message-----
From: DANIEL BYRNE [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 10:34 AM
To: Frye, Robert J (US SSA); MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

What's a NEMO?

-----Original Message-----
From: Frye, Robert J (US SSA) [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 6:37 PM
To: DANIEL BYRNE; MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

Rob Frye
BAE SYSTEMS
CNIR
11487 Sunset Hills Road
Reston, VA 20190
(v)703-668-4520
(m)571-331-2846

-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Buddenberg [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 3:42 PM
To: DANIEL BYRNE
Cc: 'Wujciak, James (US SSA)'; MANET Newsgroup
Subject: RE: [manet] New FCC Regulation

airline
-- 

b