Subject: [nemo] Charter proposal

From: "T.J. Kniveton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:27:45 -0800

Here is a starting point for charter update. Please send your comments.

TJ

---

From: Zhigang Huang <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 11:00:44 +0800

Hi, T.J. Kniveton:

I think it is difficult to differentiate whether route optimization, 
multihoming or other problems are relevant to NEMO deployments or not.

would you like to describe it in detail?

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 14:35:24 +0200

TJ thanks for posting the new Charter proposal.  I've cut through the 
text with some comments, below.

T.J. Kniveton wrote:
> The WG will take a stepwise approach by standardizing some basic 
> support mechanisms based on the bidirectional tunneling approach, and
>  at the same time study the possible approaches and issues with 
> providing more optimal routing than can be had with (potentially 
> nested) tunneling. However, the WG is not chartered to actually 
> standardize a solution to such route optimization for mobile networks
>  at this point in time.

I'd suggest re-phrasing this paragraph, because in the stepwise approach 
the first step for IPv6 has already been achieved and only the IPv4 
basic support is still a future step.

> The WG will work on:
> 
> - Completing editing working group documents that are currently in
> process, and submit for RFC.
> 
> - Continue working on Route Optimization and Multihoming, in order to
> solve the problems that are relevant to NEMO deployments.
> Furthermore, security considerations for the various approaches will
> also be considered.
> 
> - Look into the issues and tradeoffs involved in making the network's
> movement visible to some mobile network nodes, by making them "NEMO
> aware".
> 

> - Address issues with base support RFC and related items, that arise
> during implementation and deployment.
> 
> The WG will:
> 
> - Ensure that solutions will scale and function for the different 
> mobile network configurations, without requiring changes to 
> Correspondent Nodes in the Internet. All solutions will aim at 
> preserving route aggregation within the Internet and will satisfy an 
> acceptable level of security (a thorough survey of new threats and an
>  analysis of their severity will be conducted for any changes
> introduced to the network).

Threats to v6 basic support or threats to the "new" solutions?

> The WG will not:
> 
> - consider routing issues inside the mobile network. Existing routing
> protocols (including MANET protocols) can be used to solve these
> problems.
> 
> - consider general route optimization, multihoming, or other problems
>   that are not related to the deployment and maintenance of NEMO networks.
>
> Goals and Milestones:
> 
> Mar 2006	  	Finish draft on Threat Analysis and Security Requirements for NEMO.

Which draft is this? draft-cho-nemo-threat-multihoming-00.txt, 
draft-jung-nemo-threat-analysis-02.txt
or draft-petrescu-nemo-threats-01.txt?  Or any other?  I can't seem to 
find it.

> Mar 2006	  	Submit Terminology as Informational to IESG
> Mar 2006	  	Submit Goals and Requirements as Informational to IESG
> Mar 2006	  	Submit final doc Multihoming Problem Statement
> Mar 2006	  	Submit final doc on NEMO Basic Support Usages
> Mar 2006	  	Submit final doc(s) on Analysis of the Solution Space for Route Optimization
> Jul 2006	  	Submit final doc on MIB for NEMO Basic Support
> Jul 2006	  	Submit final doc(s) on Prefix Delegation for NEMO
> Aug 2006		Submit -00 draft on Route Optimization for geographically distributed HAs
> Aug 2006		Submit -00 draft on MNN visibility in visited networks
> Aug 2006		Submit -00 draft on (n,n,n) ingress filtering
> Aug 2006		Submit final doc on IPv4 Traversal (with MIP6 working grp)
> Mar 2007	  	Shut down or recharter the WG to solve further identified topics

I would like to suggest an item about NEMOv4 basic support.  The 
document is a WG item and there still seems to be discussion about it 
(I'll follow up to the other thread).

Alex

---

From: "Davis, Terry L" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 07:25:00 -0800

Zhiqanq

For those of us truly working the mobility of large globally mobile
platforms; these issues are critical.

1- Without route optimization, a global platform (ship or plane) winds
up with all their traffic then flowing in triangular routing as they
move around the global.  Connexion by Boeing has demonstrated that this
triangular routing, when you are one or two continents removed from your
HA, can add up to three seconds of latency making it completely
unacceptable for many applications.  (See our presentation to the IAB in
March of 2005)

2- The normal state for an aircraft or ship will be to be connected to
multiple INDENPENDANT (!!) service providers.  This is critical as not
all providers are certified to carry "safety critical" communications to
these platforms.  Likewise, as the new global air traffic control
systems grow, an aircraft will be connected to multiple "Navigation
Service Providers(NSP)" (FAA, CAA, JAA, Eurocontrol, etc) simultaneously
especially as the handoff control from one nation's NSP to the next
nation's.  Likewise, the more narrow bandwidth communication links used
for safety services and air traffic control will NOT be shared with
general passenger Internet and voice services for obvious reasons
(security, priority, QOS, etc).

Without meeting these two requirements, anything produced by NEMO is
quite likely unusable by the large mobile network platforms, especially
aircraft.

Take care

Terry L Davis, P.E
Boeing Technical Fellow

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhigang Huang [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 7:01 PM
> To: T.J. Kniveton; ml-nemo WG
> Subject: Re: [nemo] Charter proposal
> 
> Hi, T.J. Kniveton:
>

---

From: Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:32:33 +0200

Hi Terry,

> unacceptable for many applications.  (See our presentation to the IAB in

	Is this presentation available somewhere? I've been searching it but I
didn't found it.

	Thanks a lot.

	Kind Regards,

	Carlos J.

-- 
    SÍ A LA TELEMÁTICA     http://www.sialatelematica.es
Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano     http://www.netcoms.net
GPG FP: BFF1 7C7A 6AA7 BCE3 885A  4DF1 ED0C 5952 BF89 B974

---

From: "Davis, Terry L" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:52:49 -0800

Carlos

It seems not to be on the IETF site.  I thought it was.

I'll see what I can do.

Take care
Terry

> From: Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 8:33 AM
> To: Davis, Terry L
> Cc: ml-nemo WG; T.J. Kniveton
> Subject: RE: [nemo] Charter proposal
> 
> Hi Terry,
>