Internet-Draft TVR Contact Plan March 2023
Blanchet Expires 9 September 2023 [Page]
Workgroup:
Internet Engineering Task Force
Internet-Draft:
draft-blanchet-tvr-contactplan-00
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Author:
M. Blanchet
Viagenie

Contact Plan for Time-Variant Routing

Abstract

Some networks, such as in space, have links that are up and down based on a known schedule. The links characteristics, such as latency and bandwidth, are often also known in advance. This document describes a data model, also known as contact plan or graph, and file format to be used as input to forwarding and routing engines. This specification applies for both IP and Bundle Protocol.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 9 September 2023.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

Some networks, such as in space, have links that are up and down based on a known schedule. The links characteristics, such as latency and bandwidth, are also known in advance. This document describes a data model and file format to be used as input to forwarding and routing engines.

For delay-tolerant networks using the Bundle Protocol(BP) [RFC9171], implementations have defined different formats ([iondtncp], [ionipncp], [ud3tncgf], [hdtncp]) for such data. This specification aims to specify a common interoperable format.

Since networks may have some combination of IP and BP, it is useful to have in a single file the contact plan for all types of networks and address space, hence this combined format.

While this work is related to space communications, it could be applied to any use case that is using a contact plan. s

1.1. Requirements Language

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

2. Data Model and File Format

The file is coded in JSON[RFC8259].

The file has the following first level properties:

A contact record has an "address" family. This document defines 4 families: "ip4", "ip6", "ipn", "dtn". Others may be added to the IANA registry (see Section 5). Each address family has a different syntax as shown below.

The "source", "next-hop" and "destination" are using this syntax.

A contact record contains the following properties:

The following shows an example of a contact plan.

<CODE BEGINS>

{
    "type": "tvrContactPlan",
    "version": 1,
    "lastUpdated": "2025-01-17T23:20:50Z",
    "contacts": [
      {
        "id": "f81d4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6bf6",
        "family": "ip4",
        "source": "192.0.2.0",
        "destinations": ["198.51.100.0/24", "203.0.114.0/28", "192.0.3.1"],
        "nextHop": "203.0.113.1",
        "startTime": "1985-04-12T23:20:50Z",
        "stopTime": "1985-04-13T14:12:48Z",
        "bandwidth": 1000000,
        "latency": 30000
      },
      {
        "id": "f81d4fae-abcd-efgh-a765-00a0c91e6b88",
        "family": "ip6",
        "source": "2001:db8::1",
        "destinations": ["2001:db8:abcd::/48"],
        "nextHop": "2001:db8:3::1",
        "startTime": "2030-04-12T23:20:50Z",
        "stopTime": "2031-04-13T14:12:48Z",
        "bandwidth": 10000000,
        "latency": 300000
      },
      {
        "id": "659e4fae-7dec-11d0-a765-00a0c91e6b04",
        "family": "dtn",
        "source": "dtn://ud3tn2.dtn/",
        "destinations": ["dtn://18471/","dtn://81491/"],
        "nextHop": "203.0.113.1",
        "startTime": "1985-04-12T23:20:50Z",
        "stopTime": "1985-04-13T14:12:48Z",
        "bandwidth": 1000000,
        "latency": 30000
      },
      {
        "id": "f81dab43-7dec-e8a2-a765-00a0c91e6bf6",
        "family": "ipn",
        "destinations": "ipn:5.34",
        "nextHop": "ipn:7.43",
        "startTime": "1985-04-12T23:20:50Z",
        "stopTime": "1985-04-13T14:12:48Z",
        "bandwidth": 1000000,
        "latency": 30000
      }
    ]
}


<CODE ENDS>

3. Considerations

Some Bundle Protocol implementations have defined an interface where the add, change, delete actions are performed on contact info to update the underlying contact plan. We believe this can be better accomplished at the API level, instead of within the file format. For example, if a REST API is used, the HTTP methods can be used for that purpose.

4. TODO or Comments (section to be deleted when ready for publication)

5. IANA Considerations

TBD: registry of "address family"

6. Security Considerations

TBD

7. References

7.1. Normative References

[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3339]
Klyne, G. and C. Newman, "Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", RFC 3339, DOI 10.17487/RFC3339, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3339>.
[RFC4122]
Leach, P., Mealling, M., and R. Salz, "A Universally Unique IDentifier (UUID) URN Namespace", RFC 4122, DOI 10.17487/RFC4122, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4122>.
[RFC4291]
Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4291>.
[RFC4632]
Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing (CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, DOI 10.17487/RFC4632, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4632>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8259]
Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.

7.2. Informative References

[RFC9171]
Burleigh, S., Fall, K., and E. Birrane, III, "Bundle Protocol Version 7", RFC 9171, DOI 10.17487/RFC9171, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9171>.
[ud3tncgf]
"µD3TN Contacts Data Format", <https://gitlab.com/d3tn/ud3tn/-/blob/master/doc/contacts_data_format.md>.
[hdtncp]
"High-rate Delay Tolerant Network Contact Plan Example", <https://github.com/nasa/HDTN/blob/master/module/scheduler/src/contactPlan.json>.
[iondtncp]
"ION "dtn" scheme configuration commands file", <https://sourceforge.net/p/ion-dtn/code/ci/current/tree/bpv7/doc/pod5/dtn2rc.pod>.
[ionipncp]
"ION "ipn" scheme configuration commands file", <https://sourceforge.net/p/ion-dtn/code/ci/current/tree/bpv7/doc/pod5/ipnrc.pod>.

Acknowledgements

This work is vastly inspired by Scott Burleigh's' Contact Graph Routing for DTN as implemented in ION as well as the contact plan of HDTN and uD3TN implementations.

The following people have provided comments to improve this document: Felix Walter

Author's Address

Marc Blanchet
Viagenie