Roland, Please don't interpret my postings as evaluating MANET, MIP, NEMO, MOBIKE, etc. Until our civil aviations community creates stable set of ATN IPv6 requirements, I don't know how any viable technical analysis can be done that could favor or preclude any mobility alternative.
Rather, the point of my postings was to state my tentative conclusion that requirements such as whether avionics communications must be partitioned (VPN) or not influences the relative desirability of various mobility alternatives. It is my perception that some of those alternatives potentially may impact Internet scaling, depending upon how they are designed. It is of course commonplace to use VPNs over MANETs (e.g., military deployments). I disagree with your final paragraph: VPN aggregations are definitely still on the table within elements of our community. However, RRG may -- or may not -- choose to consider that issue as we see fit. --Eric -----Original Message----- From: Roland Dobbins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > One may debatably want to do it for non-security or non-safety reasons > such as consistency or performance (e.g., an ATM study has tentatively > concluded that there are performance reasons to use VPN). If one is using some sort of compression scheme, maybe. Whether any purported benefits outweigh path agility via MANET-type ad hoc connectivity is of course a whole other discussion. At any rate, this group should not assume that VPN-type traffic engineering technology is being used to aggregate the traffic to/from large numbers of mobile nodes in transit. -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
