change caption Fist paragraph on 2-2 also says that the figure shows the BP above TCP/IP while the figure just shows generic transport/network protocols. --> change paragraph or figureEditorial ESA-FF-2 Bundle Aggregation I don't understand this paragraph and its purpose is unclear to me. Looking at Section 3 of LTP for CCSDS didn't really help me. If aggregation of bundle makes sense (as I think it does), this could be handled by convergence layer adapters or by BP (depending on the CL characteristics). Why is the paragraph just referring to LTP while the remaining standard tries to be independent from the protocols used for transport. --> clarify bundle aggregation and explain how aggregation should be achieved possibly in a transport-protocol agnostic way.Recommended">

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

SIS_DTN 1 DTN BP Protocol Specification May 2010 Darmstadt 2012.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "SIS_DTN 1 DTN BP Protocol Specification May 2010 Darmstadt 2012."— Presentation transcript:

1 SIS_DTN 1 DTN BP Protocol Specification May 2010 Darmstadt 2012

2 SIS_DTN 2 Status Goals of this activity Advance BP towards Blue Book status Current activity Updates from the last BP working group were incorporated Since the last activity the BP book has passed CMC and CESG polls At the last working group meeting forward work was proposed for the red-1 document - Status of the Bundle Security Protocol in relation to BP - Generation of a yellow book - RID collection and review May 2010

3 SIS_DTN 3 Status Current activity Document is now at a red-1 status - Document review completed April 09 - RID summary attached May 2010 RID #Short TitlePage #Paragraph #From, ToClassificationSupporting Analysis INPE-AA-1Meaning of SANA2-2; 3-2; C-11;1;1 Eliminate the row 4 from “Figure 2-1” to “right” Explain what means SANA in row 1. It could be interesting to relate paragraph 1 with the MIB OF FIGURE 1-1 ON PAGE 1-3. Editorial The draft is well structured and the main concepts are clearly established. ESA-DS-4QoS From "Services not provided by BP" to "Qualities of service not provided by BP"Recommended The service is the bundle service.These are QoSs. ESA-DS-5Reliance on LTP From "shall be by Licklider Transport Protocol" to "shall be by provided by the underlying service (e.g. Licklider Transport Protocol), if available.Recommended Uneccessary and specific reliance on LTP for aggregation ESA-DS-6Duplication5-25.2Add statement on duplication.Recommended Section doesn't specify whether BP can tolerate SDU duplication. ESA-FF-1BP Figure Figure 2-1 shows the BP always above the link layer, not at the link layer. (While I think it could be at the link layer, the typical place is probably above transport as shown). --> change caption Fist paragraph on 2-2 also says that the figure shows the BP above TCP/IP while the figure just shows generic transport/network protocols. --> change paragraph or figureEditorial ESA-FF-2 Bundle Aggregation I don't understand this paragraph and its purpose is unclear to me. Looking at Section 3 of LTP for CCSDS didn't really help me. If aggregation of bundle makes sense (as I think it does), this could be handled by convergence layer adapters or by BP (depending on the CL characteristics). Why is the paragraph just referring to LTP while the remaining standard tries to be independent from the protocols used for transport. --> clarify bundle aggregation and explain how aggregation should be achieved possibly in a transport-protocol agnostic way.Recommended

4 SIS_DTN 4 May 2010 ESA-FF-3 Delivery Failure Action The "delivery failure action" from the Register.request is not in Section 4.3 "Summary of Parameters". --> add description to 4.3Recommended ESA-FF-4Registration State The "registration state" from the ChangeRegistrationState.request is not in Section 4.3 "Summary of Parameters". --> add description to 4.3Recommended ESA-FF-5Header Information The "header information" from the BundleDelivery.Indication is not in Section 4.3 "Summary of Parameters". --> add description to 4.3Recommended ESA-CT-2QOS2.4 Add reliable and in-sequence delivery, with no duplication capabilities to the protocol.Technical Fact ESA-CT-3Comment When I see the amount of open questions that still remain on the application of DTN to our typical missions, I can’t but help wondering if we (CCSDS) are correct to publish a Blue book at this stage. The sheer complexity of the protocol coupled with the number of developments that still to be made to arrive at a viable solution fill me with a large level of doubt that we embarking on a correct course. As far as I am aware the implementations made so far are mainly IP based using the existing ISS infrastructure and while I’m aware that there has been some success, I also wonder if similarresults could be achieved using a standards IP stack. What results we may obtain in a traditional spacecraft mission with the resource and operational constraints that apply is anyone’s guess at the moment. I therefore wonder if the blue book might be better be considered as experimental until such times as the development is completed.Technical Fact CommentvariousEditorial from MSFC (referential)Recommended RID #Short TitlePage #Paragraph #From, ToClassificationSupporting Analysis

5 SIS_DTN 5 Backups May 2010

6 SIS_DTN 6 May 2010


Download ppt "SIS_DTN 1 DTN BP Protocol Specification May 2010 Darmstadt 2012."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google