Le 19/09/2023 à 03:08, Jorge Amodio a écrit :
I believe that a better definition and characterization of "NTN"
would be appropriate.
True.
NTN can represent a yuuuuuuuuge space... networking to Proxima
Centauri could be considered NTN, but I bet you will have a
completely different set of challenges than LEO, MEO, GEO, etc.
I'd look at where and how 'NTN' term originated. I believe it was at
ITU several years ago that it was coined, even though I might be wrong.
But in recent years it is used extensively at 3GPP.
The way in which 3GPP uses this term 'NTN' makes think very much of a
HAP (high-alti platform), or maybe one or two satellites, maybe at MEO
or GEO orbits, but LEO is also in the picture. The examples that could
approach that 'NTN', without being 'NTN', are the recent smartphones
huawei mate60 pro on a GEO sat in a set of 3, but the iphone 14 and 15
is via LEO sats globalstar; none of the two are 'NTN'-labelled even
though they are certainly 3GPP devices.
Proxima Centauri: before that, I suppose they'll put 3GPP bases stations
and user equipment on the Moon and on Mars, if not on a comet. For the
moment it's not called 'NTN' but NTN does make sense indeed, because
it's non-terrestrial.
Alex
My .02 Jorge
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 8:01 PM David Lang <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023, Hesham ElBakoury wrote:
My understanding is that for integrated NTN and Terrestrial
network we may
need new or enhanced routing protocols. There are many
publications in this
area.
I don't see how starlink hops have to be treated any differently
than terrestrial tunnels (think frame relay networks that overlay a
virtual network on top of the physical network, encrypted or not).
There probably are new routing protocols that will handle these
better than current ones, but I see that a matter of such links being
more common, rather than being fundementally different.
I do see that in the future, if/as information about the in-space
routing becomes more open (and I strongly suspect, stabilizes more)
that there will be more that can be done, and at some point it may
even make sense to allow for 'peering' between satellites from
different providers (which would require standardization of the
in-space signals and protocols)
I may be missing something at this point (I don't claim to be a
networking expert, but I'm seeing buzzwords here, but not an
explination of why normal IP routing isn't sufficient.
David Lang
I suggest that you discuss your view in int-sat email list
(copied)
Thanks Hesham
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023, 5:31 PM David Lang <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023, Hesham ElBakoury wrote:
Given the discussions in this email thread, what IETF should
standardize
in
priority order for the integrated NTN terrestrial networks?
I don't see why you need to do any particular standardization to
integrate
things like starlink into terrestrial networks.
Just like IETF didn't need to standardize ethernet/token
ring/arcnet/modems to make them compatible with each other. They
all talk IP, and a
computer
with a link to each of them can serve as a gateway (and this
included
proprietary
modems that were not compatible with anything else, the network
didn't
care)
Starlink is just another IP path, all the tools that you use
with any
other ISP work on that path (or are restricted like many other
consumer
ISPs with
dynamic addressing, no inbound connections, no BGP peering, etc.
No
reason that
the those couldn't work, SpaceX just opts not to support them on
consumer
dishes)
I'll turn the question back to you, what is the problem that you
think is
there that needs to be solved?
David Lang
Thanks, Hesham
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023, 12:59 PM David Lang via Starlink <
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
it's very clear that there is a computer in the dishy that
you are
talking
to. You get the network connection while the dishy is not
connected to the
satellites (there's even a status page and controls, stowing
and
unstowing
for example)
I think we've seen that the dishy is running linux (I know
the
routers
run
an old openwrt), but I don't remember the details of the
dishy
software.
David Lang
On Sun, 17 Sep 2023, Alexandre Petrescu via Starlink wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2023 19:21:50 +0200 From: Alexandre
Petrescu via Starlink
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: Alexandre Petrescu <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Starlink] Main hurdles against the
Integration of
Satellites and
Terrestial Networks
Le 16/09/2023 à 01:32, Ulrich Speidel via Starlink a écrit
:
On 16/09/2023 5:52 am, David Lang wrote:
In addition to that Ulrich says, the dishy is a full
computer, it's
output is ethernet/IP and with some adapters or cable
changes, you
can plug it directly into a router.
We've done that with the Yaosheng PoE Dishy adapter -
actually plugged
a DHCP client straight in - and it "works" but with a
noticeably higher rate of disconnects.
It is good to know one can plug a DHCP client into the
Ethernet of the
DISHY and receive DHCP replies.
But that would be only a lead into what kind of DHCPv4 is
supported, or
not.
I would ask to know whether the DHCP server runs on the
DISHY, or whether it is on the ground network of starlink,
i.e. the
reply to DHCP
request comes after 50ms, or after 500microseconds
(timestamp
difference
can be seen in the wireshark run on that Ethernet).
This (DHCP server daemon on dishy or on ground segment)
has
an impact
of
how IPv6 can be, or is, made to work.
This kind of behaviour of DHCP - basically asking who
allocates an
address - has seen a continous evolution in 3GPP cellular
networks
since
they appeared. Nowadays the DHCP behaviour is very
complex
in a 3GPP
network; even in a typical smartphone there are
intricacies
about where
and how the DHCP client and server works. With it comes
the
problem of
/64 in cellular networks (which some dont call a problem,
but
I do).
So, it would be interesting to see whether starlink has
the
same /64
problem as 3GPP has, or is free of it (simply put: can I
connect
several
Ethernet subnets in my home to starlink, in native IPv6
that
is, or
not?).
Alex
_______________________________________________ Starlink
mailing list [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
<https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink>
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
<https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink>
--
Sat-int mailing list [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sat-int
<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sat-int>
_______________________________________________
Starlink mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
