Subject: [Tm-rid] RAA/HDA - drawing the line in 32 bits

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 13:29:27 +0800

In draft-moskowitz-hip-hierarchical-hit-01.txt, I use 14 bits (16,384) 
for the RAA space and 18 bits (262,144) for HDA within each RAA.  Seems 
reasonable enough for me.  Good as any guess about the future.

Tero Kivinen suggested a soft separation with the HDA in little endian 
order.  This way we might have time to figure out where we need more, 
RAAs or HDAs.

Sounds interesting, but I see potential problem(s) if one RAA really 
runs up its number of HDAs and thus limits the number of RAAs in total 
as a result.

Oh, and the 32bit space will be represented in DNS as nibbles.

Comments?

Bob

---

From: "Card, Stu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 14:45:51 +0800

I'm fond of a simple 16 + 16 with the understanding that a single RRA
operator might be granted more than 1 value, enabling finer distinctions
than simply jurisdiction, e.g. if the US FAA were such an operator, it
could use 1 RRA value for Government HDAs & another for commercial HDAs.

For reference:
How many TLDs exist?
How domain name registrars?
How many domain name registry operators?
How many IEEE OUIs exist?
How many distinct organizations hold OUIs?

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019, 1:29 PM Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> --
> Tm-rid mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tm-rid
>

---

From: Tero Kivinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 09:16:08 +0200

> runs up its number of HDAs and thus limits the number of RAAs in total 

I think we should be strict hard limit for RAAs for how many HDAs it
can before it needs to come back for asking changing. For example say
12-bits for HDAs and if it looks like there are going to be multiple
RAAs running out of 12-bit space, then we can expand it to 16-bit etc.

If it just one RAA getting very large, we can of course give him
2nd RAA number.

The IPv4 addresses just showed that we can never get the split right
on the first time...

-- 
[email-masked]

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:35:44 +0800

> The IPv4 addresses just showed that we can never get the split right

CIDR was a lot of fun.  Great heated debates in the meetings.  Fun had 
by all.

BTW, I really welcome this discussion.  I will capture it in the next 
HHIT draft.

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 17:09:33 +0800

> If it just one RAA getting very large, we can of course give him

Another item to toss into the mix is an HDA requesting a second or so 
number.  After registering so many HHITs, the collision rate becomes 
'unacceptable' and the move to a new HDA number for new registrations.

How many deliveries might UPS make a day via UAs?  A new HHIT per 
delivery or only per day?  This could run through a lot of HHITs.

Will some HDAs deprecate expired HHITs and allow reuse or keep the 
numbers around even after they are released by the owner?

All policy issues that will impact the hierarchy space.

-- 
Standard Robert Moskowitz
Owner
HTT Consulting
C:248-219-2059
F:248-968-2824
E:[email-masked]

There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who 
gets the credit

---

From: "Card, Stu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 17:55:08 +0800

I think we need to assume that many commercial UAS operators will use 1
HHIT per flight. Given the large number of UAS & frequency of flights, this
will rapidly consume enough of even a large space that collisions will
rise. So HHITs will need lifetimes & to be reclaimed for re-use.

I know many will pillory me for saying this: maybe claim a HHIT by
appending it in a blinded form to a blockchain? For blinding, I'm thinking
back before Satoshi Nakamoto, to David Chaum's & Stefan Brands' work...
also more recently Jan Camenisch & Anna Lyskayana...

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019, 5:09 PM Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> How many deliveries might UPS make a day via UAs?  A new HHIT per delivery
> or only per day?  This could run through a lot of HHITs.
>
> Will some HDAs deprecate expired HHITs and allow reuse or keep the numbers
> around even after they are released by the owner?
>
> Robert Moskowitz
> C:      248-219-2059
> F:      248-968-2824
> E:      [email-masked]
>
> There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who gets
> the credit
> --
> Tm-rid mailing list
> [email-masked]

---

From: Robert Moskowitz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 20:21:28 +0800

And it is more than that.

The USS may run one HDA for the pilot system and not publish the HI for 
those systems.  Only authorized people need to know how to contact the 
piloting system.  Whereas the HHIT for the UA is public along with the 
HI.  Pilot systems will tend to be stable, though the binding to pilot 
will change but that is USS backend data.  It is the UA HHIT that may 
change.

I don't think the blockchain stuff helps here.

As to how to gen a new keypair it might just gen or use:

draft-barnes-cfrg-mult-for-7748

It is a tossup as to which is computationally and power cheaper.  I plan 
on referencing the above draft in the next ver of HHIT.

On 11/21/19 5:55 PM, Card, Stu wrote:
> I think we need to assume that many commercial UAS operators will use 
> 1 HHIT per flight. Given the large number of UAS & frequency of 
> flights, this will rapidly consume enough of even a large space that 
> collisions will rise. So HHITs will need lifetimes & to be reclaimed 
> for re-use.
>
> appending it in a blinded form to a blockchain? For blinding, I'm 
> thinking back before Satoshi Nakamoto, to David Chaum's & Stefan 
> Brands' work... also more recently Jan Camenisch & Anna Lyskayana...
>
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019, 5:09 PM Robert Moskowitz 
> <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     Another item to toss into the mix is an HDA requesting a second or
>     so number.  After registering so many HHITs, the collision rate
>     becomes 'unacceptable' and the move to a new HDA number for new
>     registrations.
>
>     E: [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>
>     There's no limit to what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter
>     who gets the credit
>     -- 
>     Tm-rid mailing list
>     [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 10:42:20 +0800

> RAAs running out of 12-bit space, then we can expand it to 16-bit etc.

Given that we don't have to bake this split into end-user software (which was
the problem with IPv4 before CIDR), then I am in favour of this split.
(Clearly the allocation agency needs to know the split)

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-