<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2026-03-24 11:37, ARIN wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:55CE07F2-6D56-461E-8477-9DDB83120DAF@arin.net">
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">On 19 March 2026, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted “ARIN-prop-349: Taking IP To Other Planets (TIPTOP)” as Draft Policy.
Draft Policy ARIN-2026-1 is below and can be found at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2026_1">https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2026_1</a>
You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC will evaluate the discussion to assess the conformance of this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet number resource policy as stated in the Policy Development Process (PDP). Specifically, these principles are:
* Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
* Technically Sound
* Supported by the Community
The PDP can be found at:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/">https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/</a>
Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/">https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Have the various groups known as 'Delay Tolerant Networking
(DTN)' been involved in any of these discussions? They are the
ones typically involved in addressing, protocol selection, etc. I
would start there. There are a a few other similar groups around.</p>
<p>A couple items I had laying around in my mailbox:</p>
<p>----------</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello, a new article has been posted to the
APNIC Blog on “Delay Tolerant Networking Performance”:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <a
href="https://blog.apnic.net/2024/03/25/delay-tolerant-networking-performance/"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://blog.apnic.net/2024/03/25/delay-tolerant-networking-performance/</a></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> The article specifically addresses performance
aspects of the Licklider Transmission Protocol (LTP)<br>
based on two popular DTN implementations with complimentary use
cases. The article highlights<br>
the performance increases observed for using larger LTP segment
sizes even when lower layer|<br>
fragmentation is necessary to accommodate the larger sizes. The
article finally includes a new<br>
service for signaling lower-layer QoS parameters for networks that
support DTN overlays.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> This article has important implications for
IPv4 and IPv6 Internetworking in that it provides<br>
evidence that larger packet sizes have significantly beneficial
implications for performance<br>
|even when IP fragmentation is invoked. It suggests that better
support for large packets<br>
through larger link and path MTUs as well as properly functioning
IP fragmentation are<br>
important for the future of the Internet. The new Firewall and
Service Tickets (FAST)<br>
service should also provide significant QoS benefits.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Please review and comment,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Fred Templin <a
href="mailto:fred.l.templin@boeing.com"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">fred.l.templin@boeing.com</a></p>
<p>-------</p>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:dtn@ietf.org">dtn@ietf.org</a></p>
<pre wrap="" class="moz-quote-pre">The Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking (DTN) Working Group specifies
mechanisms for data communications in the presence of long delays and/or
intermittent connectivity. The Working Group has published the Bundle
Protocol v7 (BPv7), corresponding Bundle Protocol Security protocol (BPSec)
and an interoperable Security Context, and the TCP Convergence Layer
specifications as standards track RFCs. Multiple independent implementations
exist for these technologies in both space and terrestrial environments, and
the technology is now used in production by government and commercial
organizations world-wide.
This Working Group now focuses on the further work relevant to the area of
Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking, dividing work items into 3
broad categories:
* An architecture for Naming, Addressing and Forwarding
The Bundle Protocol v7 defines an encoding of Names for use in DTN, but
the detailed semantics have not been specified. The Working Group will
define a common architecture for the delay/disruption tolerant assignment
of names, and the late-binding of such names during bundle forwarding to
end-points within a DTN. This architecture will define a standard model
for the forwarding process of a Bundle Process Agent, providing an
informational reference point for further specifications.
The Working Group charter intentionally excludes topics related to Routing
in DTNs. This does not preclude discussion of the subject, in coordination
with the Routing Area, but no Working Group documents will be adopted
under this charter.
* The definition of architecture and protocols in the areas of Operations,
Administration and Management (OAM), and Key Management
Current DTN deployments rely on the use of pre-placed keys and
configuration or bespoke tooling, and there is a growing demand for
standards to improve the automation and reliability of DTN management.
Existing IETF protocols for OAM and Key Management generally rely on a
bi-directional end-to-end path between devices, and in Delay/Disruption
Tolerant Networks (DTNs) such paths rarely exist. To enable OAM and Key
Management in such cases, there may be a need to standardize an
architecture supporting alternative methods and their supporting protocols
and data models. The Working Group will liaise with relevant experts in
the OPS Area to discover if there are existing standards that meet, or may
be extended to meet, the DTN use-cases before standardizing new protocols.
There is also believed to be cross-over between the use-cases for OAM and
Key Management in DTNs and the use-cases in Mobile Ad-hoc Networks
(MANETs); to this end the Working Group will coordinate with the MANET
Working Group to explore potential synergies and avoid duplication of
effort.
* Extensions to and best practices for existing protocols
Extensions to the Bundle Protocol to enable reliability signalling,
tunnelling and Quality of Service indication are needed for the
operational deployment of Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networks, and these
capabilities will be standardized by the Working Group.
Additional extensions to the Bundle Protocol, additional Security Context
definitions for BPSec, and new Convergence Layer adaptors will be
considered on a case-by-case basis by the working group.
The Working Group will also document best practices learned from existing
deployment.
The Working Group will coordinate with other IETF Working Groups, especially
in the Security, Routing, Operation and Management Areas, to ensure the
quality of peer review, the avoidance of duplication of effort, and alignment
with specifications produced in other Working Groups.</pre>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>