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 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 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@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@lists.bufferbloat.net> > >>>>> Reply-To: Alexandre Petrescu > >>>>> To: starlink@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@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Starlink mailing list > >>>> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > >>>> > >>> > >-- > Sat-int mailing list > Sat-int@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sat-int >