[Starlink] [Sat-int] Main hurdles against the Integration of Satellites and Terrestial Networks

Mon Sep 18 21:08:13 EDT 2023

I believe that a better definition and characterization of "NTN" would be
appropriate.

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.

My .02
Jorge

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 8:01 PM David Lang <david at lang.hm> 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 <david at lang.hm> 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 <
> >>> starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net> 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 <
> starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> >>>>> Reply-To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu at gmail.com>
> >>>>> To: starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> >>>>> 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
> >>>>> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Starlink mailing list
> >>>> Starlink at lists.bufferbloat.net
> >>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
> >>>>
> >>>
> >--
> Sat-int mailing list
> Sat-int at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sat-int
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/starlink/attachments/20230918/73a4cdbc/attachment.html>