Military Communications and Information Technology: A Trusted ...
Military Communications and Information Technology: A Trusted ... Military Communications and Information Technology: A Trusted ...
178 Military Communications and Information Technology... References [1] NATO Network Enabled Capability Feasibility Study Executive Summary v. 2.0, October 2005. [2] G. Hallingstad and S. Oudkerk, “Protected core networking: an architectural approach to secure and flexible communications”, Communications Magazine, IEEE, 2008, 46, pp. 35-41. [3] PerfSONAR Homepage (last accessed May 24, 2012). [4] perfSONAR MDM release 3.0 – Product Brief. [5] Instantiating a Global Network Measurement Framework http://acs.lbl.gov/~tierney/ papers/perfsonar-LBNL-report.pdf. [6] P. Steinmetz, “Use of Cross Domain Guards for CoNSIS network management“, MCC 2012, Gdansk, Poland, in press. [7] PerfSONAR: A Service Oriented Architecture for Multi-domain Network Monitoring. [8] P. Jacobs and B. Davie, “Technical challenges in the delivery of interprovider QoS”, Communication Magazine, IEEE, vol. 43, no. 6, 2005, pp. 112-118. [9] D. Duda et al., “The QoS Policy Agreement System for Federation of Communications and Information Systems”, MCC 2011, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Oct. 2011. [10] M. Hauge, M.A. Brose, J. Sander, and J. Andersson, “Multi-topology routing for improved network resource utilization in mobile tactical networks,” Military Communications Conference, 2010 – MILCOM 2010, pp. 2223-2228, Oct. 31 2010- Nov. 3 2010. [11] M. Hauge, CoNSIS Task 1, “QoS-classes for the CoNSIS test and demonstration architecture”. [12] “Cacti – The Complete RRDTool-based Graphing Solution”, http://www.cacti.net/ (last accessed June 13, 2012). [13] A. Morton and S. Van den Berghe, “Framework for Metric Composition”, December 2009, . [14] A. Morton and E.Stephan, “Spacial Composition of Metrics”, IETF-RFC6049 January 2011. [15] I. Aktas, J. Otten, F. Schmidt, and K. Wehrle, “Towards a Flexible and Versatile Cross-Layer-Coordination Architecture,” Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM 2010), pp. 1-5, March 2010. [16] I. Aktas, F. Schmidt, M.H. Alizai, T. Drüner, and K. Wehrle, “CRAWLER: An Experimentation Architecture for System Monitoring and Cross-Layer- Coordination,” Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on a World of Wireless, Mobile and MultimediaNetworks (WoWMoM ’12), pp. 1-9, June 2012, in press.
Multi-Topology Routing for QoS Support in the CoNSIS Convoy MANET Mariann Hauge 1 , Jon Andersson 2 , Margrete A. Brose 1 , Jostein Sander 1 1 Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI), Kjeller, Norway, {Mariann.Hauge, Margrete-Allern.Brose, Jostein.Sander}@ffi.no 2 Thales Norway AS, Oslo, Norway, Jon.Andersson@thalesgroup.com Abstract: This paper shows how Multi-Topology (MT) routing is used to maintain three different network topologies in the heterogeneous land mobile network architecture used in the Coalition Network for Secure Information Sharing (CoNSIS) project. The topologies are each associated with one or more quality of service (QoS) classes to provide differentiated QoS in this disadvantaged grid. A proposal for how to connect a Multi-Topology routing protocol to adjacent Single-Topology (ST) interior gateway protocols and exterior gateway protocols is also given. Keywords: multi-topology routing; QoS; admission control; MANET; OSPF; IPv6) I. Introduction In a coalition operation the participating nations will typically bring their national radio equipment into the theater. Usually the equipment will comprise of a wide selection of brands and technologies, depicting the normally long lifetime of radio systems. These radios will most likely not be compatible on the air, and if they are, they will not have compatible security solutions, management or services for the end user. The main goal of the multinational Coalition Network for Secure Information Sharing (CoNSIS) project is to solve these interoperability issues. CoNSIS proposes solutions to improve interoperability in all the above mentioned areas. This paper presents the Multi-Topology routing concept as used by CoNSIS to provide differentiated QoS in the land mobile network that utilizes many different transmission technologies for internal communication as well as reach-back to the deployed headquarters. To provide a reliable network for different operation types and in varying terrains, a tactical mobile network infrastructure must consist of a variety of wireless network types, e.g., long-range communication for reach-back connections The authors have copy right of all figures in the paper “Multi-Topology Routing for QoS Support in the CoNSIS Convoy MANET”.
- Page 128 and 129: 128 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 130 and 131: 130 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 132 and 133: 132 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 134 and 135: 134 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 136 and 137: 136 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 138 and 139: 138 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 140 and 141: 140 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 142 and 143: 142 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 144 and 145: 144 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 146 and 147: 146 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 149 and 150: Use of Cross Domain Guards for CoNS
- Page 151 and 152: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 153 and 154: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 155 and 156: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 157 and 158: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 159: Chapter 2: Communications and Infor
- Page 162 and 163: 162 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 164 and 165: 164 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 166 and 167: 166 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 168 and 169: 168 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 170 and 171: 170 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 172 and 173: 172 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 174 and 175: 174 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 176 and 177: 176 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 180 and 181: 180 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 182 and 183: 182 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 184 and 185: 184 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 186 and 187: 186 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 188 and 189: 188 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 190 and 191: 190 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 192 and 193: 192 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 194 and 195: 194 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 196 and 197: 196 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 199: Chapter 3 Information Technology fo
- Page 202 and 203: 202 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 204 and 205: 204 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 206 and 207: 206 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 208 and 209: 208 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 210 and 211: 210 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 212 and 213: 212 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 214 and 215: 214 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 216 and 217: 216 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 218 and 219: 218 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 220 and 221: 220 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 222 and 223: 222 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 224 and 225: 224 Military Communications and Inf
- Page 226 and 227: 226 Military Communications and Inf
178 <strong>Military</strong> <strong>Communications</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Information</strong> <strong>Technology</strong>...<br />
References<br />
[1] NATO Network Enabled Capability Feasibility Study Executive Summary v. 2.0,<br />
October 2005.<br />
[2] G. Hallingstad <strong>and</strong> S. Oudkerk, “Protected core networking: an architectural<br />
approach to secure <strong>and</strong> flexible communications”, <strong>Communications</strong> Magazine, IEEE,<br />
2008, 46, pp. 35-41.<br />
[3] PerfSONAR Homepage (last accessed May 24, 2012).<br />
[4] perfSONAR MDM release 3.0 – Product Brief.<br />
[5] Instantiating a Global Network Measurement Framework http://acs.lbl.gov/~tierney/<br />
papers/perfsonar-LBNL-report.pdf.<br />
[6] P. Steinmetz, “Use of Cross Domain Guards for CoNSIS network management“,<br />
MCC 2012, Gdansk, Pol<strong>and</strong>, in press.<br />
[7] PerfSONAR: A Service Oriented Architecture for Multi-domain Network Monitoring.<br />
[8] P. Jacobs <strong>and</strong> B. Davie, “Technical challenges in the delivery of interprovider QoS”,<br />
Communication Magazine, IEEE, vol. 43, no. 6, 2005, pp. 112-118.<br />
[9] D. Duda et al., “The QoS Policy Agreement System for Federation of <strong>Communications</strong><br />
<strong>and</strong> <strong>Information</strong> Systems”, MCC 2011, Amsterdam, The Netherl<strong>and</strong>s, Oct. 2011.<br />
[10] M. Hauge, M.A. Brose, J. S<strong>and</strong>er, <strong>and</strong> J. Andersson, “Multi-topology routing<br />
for improved network resource utilization in mobile tactical networks,” <strong>Military</strong><br />
<strong>Communications</strong> Conference, 2010 – MILCOM 2010, pp. 2223-2228, Oct. 31 2010-<br />
Nov. 3 2010.<br />
[11] M. Hauge, CoNSIS Task 1, “QoS-classes for the CoNSIS test <strong>and</strong> demonstration<br />
architecture”.<br />
[12] “Cacti – The Complete RRDTool-based Graphing Solution”, http://www.cacti.net/<br />
(last accessed June 13, 2012).<br />
[13] A. Morton <strong>and</strong> S. Van den Berghe, “Framework for Metric Composition”, December<br />
2009, .<br />
[14] A. Morton <strong>and</strong> E.Stephan, “Spacial Composition of Metrics”, IETF-RFC6049<br />
January 2011.<br />
[15] I. Aktas, J. Otten, F. Schmidt, <strong>and</strong> K. Wehrle, “Towards a Flexible <strong>and</strong> Versatile<br />
Cross-Layer-Coordination Architecture,” Proceedings of the 29th International<br />
Conference on Computer <strong>Communications</strong> (INFOCOM 2010), pp. 1-5, March 2010.<br />
[16] I. Aktas, F. Schmidt, M.H. Alizai, T. Drüner, <strong>and</strong> K. Wehrle, “CRAWLER:<br />
An Experimentation Architecture for System Monitoring <strong>and</strong> Cross-Layer-<br />
Coordination,” Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on a World<br />
of Wireless, Mobile <strong>and</strong> MultimediaNetworks (WoWMoM ’12), pp. 1-9, June 2012,<br />
in press.