Subject: [RRG] Embedded systems

From: Randall Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 17:09:58 -0700

Earlier Eric F wrote:
% I'd like to point out that an large number of embedded system devices
% are increasingly using IP networks for their communications.

How many of these are both
      (1) end-of-maintenance
and (2) has IPv6 implemented and enabled today ?

My guess is that the intersection of those 2 items is zero.

For the US DoD, everyone who should know tells me that
(2) by itself is either zero or tiny.

Is this really an IPv4-specific consideration ?

So if approach A were taken for IPv4 and approach B
for IPv6, then B could be designed without this issue ?

Thanks,

Ran

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg

---

From: "Fleischman, Eric" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:37:45 -0700

I believe that the situation is more complex than this.

I am only personally aware of embedded systems using IPv4 at this time.
Nevertheless, I do not think that embedded systems are an IPv4-only
domain because certain industries are talking about deploying non-IPv4
networks. For example, in civil aviation, the current air-to-ground
digital communication target is the Aeronautical Telecommunications
Network (ATN), which is an OSI (CLNP/TP4) network. ICAO is talking about
soon creating an IPv6 variant to ATN. However, I have not heard anybody
mention an IPv4 variant. 

Given this, what protocol will a future onboard collision-avoidance
system use? Would it natively use IPv4 that is translated or
encapsulated into either OSI or IPv6 for off-board communications, if
any? Would it natively use either OSI or IPv6? Would it do something
else?

-----Original Message-----
From: Randall Atkinson [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Earlier Eric F wrote:
% I'd like to point out that an large number of embedded system devices
% are increasingly using IP networks for their communications.

So if approach A were taken for IPv4 and approach B for IPv6, then B
could be designed without this issue ?

Thanks,

Ran