Download Topic 1: Advantages/Disadvantages of an IP Based Aerial Network

Topic 1: Advantages/Disadvantages of an IP Based Aerial Network
Organization: Harris Government Communication Systems Division
Panel Member: Keith Olds and/or Steve Von Edwins
Address: MS Ren 11-F; PO Box 37, Melbourne, FL 32902-0037
Email: [email protected]
Fax: 321-729-7675
Phone: 321 729-3597
Abstract:
We at Harris believe there is no practical alternative to an IP-based aerial network. The primary
reason is the huge investment in IP technologies, hardware and software that has been made and
is continuing. IP has advantages such as:
IP standards exist and are universally accepted and deployed
Non-recurring investments have been and continue to be large
There is a large installed base with long term commitments to IP
IP has proven to be very flexible since it was designed to allow non-compatible networks to
communicate.
Among IP’s disadvantages are:
IP technology is optimized for wired networks. It is wasteful of communications bandwidth
having huge overhead, presenting serious challenges when used with wireless Physical Layers.
IP network security is complex. IP networks were designed to be open and universally
accessible. We are now attempting to apply them in networks that must be closed and are subject
to attack.
IP is datagram based which presents challenges when used with real-time and streaming
applications.
The largest challenges will be in the areas of Information Assurance and managing RF frequency
resources.
In spite of the challenges, IP based networks have been proven to be effective and represent the
universal standard for modern networks.
Harris is concerned that the concept of a “single integrated network security and management
system” for the DoD is intractable. History teaches that systems fail when tasked to provide
universal solutions to large problems. Recent history in the DoD communication world offers
good examples. Technical risks and challenges are difficult. However, philosophy differences
among the services, politics, cost, information assurance, and CONOPS rooted problems are
likely to prove more difficult. We are concerned the Service Oriented Architectures “craze” will
carry an overhead burden that could prevent an aerial network from meeting mission needs
before the network is deployed. Harris believes that a more practical approach exploits the
autonomy and flexibility available with modern processing to allow multiple co-existing
management domains.
One advantage of IP networks is they can be segmented. Networks can take full advantage of IP
and not be integrated into one universally managed network. Emerging network management
architectures that rely on remote, policy-based situational management and local autonomy
should be more tractable than an all encompassing manager. Service specific networks can be
managed apart from the other services. The complexity and impracticality of a single aerial
network can be avoided.
The problem is complicated by extending a single network to the tactical edge. The number of
platforms (aircraft, net enabled weapons, ground vehicles, individual soldiers) is huge, network
topology is constantly changing, and resources are constantly changing. Information assurance
problems are compounded by Multiple Independent Levels of Security, uncleared personnel
using the network in hostile territory, developing integrated security policies and procedures, etc.
In summary, IP based aerial networks offer huge technological and cost advantages. However,
choosing to implement a single network for all services may be a flawed approach.
Steve Von Edwins
Airborne Battlespace Networks
Harris Government Communication Systems
321 729-3597 voice
321 795-5734 cell
[email protected]