1. Distributed Space/Ground Network Centric Operations Research Testbed
Lunar6
Distributed
Space/Ground
Network Centric Operations
Research Testbed

2. Approach Industry/Academia/NASA combined space network testbeds
Protocol Development
Allow Academia and Industry to develop the protocols
Allow NASA to concentrate on reliable flight hardware/software implementation
Aerospace Communication and Network Engineer development (for NASA and DoD)
Include NASA Operations Personnel
Human Factors
Social Factors
Protocol Development and Deployment (including operational experience)
Internet Protocol version 6
Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking
International Collaboration on protocol development (DTN bone)
bundle agent discovery for space
International Interoperability
Sharing of resources (ground stations, relays)
Automated Scheduling (NASA, ESA, JAXA, commercial)
Network Security (Securely Combining Networks where appropriate)
Security
International Operations
ITAR (And the foreign state equivalent)
Store-and-Forward (data at rest)
Key and Policy distribution
Operations and operational deployment Issues– particularly manned operations
Voice Loops (audio multiplexing)
Multicast commanding during launch (flood routing)
Off-Nominal operations
Unidirectional links
Radio Cross-strapping (addressing and security considerations)
Routing
Network Addressing
Networks in Motion (nemo), a mobile IP based routing mechanism
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (manet)
Standard routing mechanisms (OSPF, RIP, etc)

3. Testbed Monitoring and Human Factors
Anomaly Implementation and Control Network
Distributed NCO Testbed
(All Operations over Emulated Links!)

4. Rules of Engagement
One is only allowed to command, control, communicate, and update systems over the links expected in space
Failures will be injected into systems to experiment with recovery techniques;
Failures will be implemented over an anomaly control network independent of the communications network
Failure modes could be recommended by NASA Operations personnel
A separate high-rate human factors monitoring network could be put into place to monitor the people working on configuring and trouble-shooting the communications network..
This would provide interesting information on human factors.
Such information would be invaluable to NASA.
The various systems will even be place in remote locations such as different universities.

5. Distributed Testbed (Notional)
Case Western
Reserve
University of
Southern California
Florida
State
New Hampsire
Washington State
Keio University
Université de Toulouse
Carnegie Mellon
University
Crew
Exploration
Vehicle
(CEV)
Relay
Satellite
Communications
Satellite
Lunar Base
Station
Controls: University of Houston, Cleveland State
Psychology: Harvard, Yale, Stanford
Tracking
Station
Flight Test
Facility
Launch Site
Ground
Station
Control
Center

6. Skill Sets NASA has numerous excellent communication engineers.
Excellent understanding of point-to-point radio communications.
Generally have very little knowledge of how the radio system affects the upper layers of the protocol stack, the networking, transport, security, and applications.
NASA has numerous excellent terrestrial networking engineers. Some of these engineers even understand network security.
It is an extremely rare individual that understands the interaction of radio systems and networks.
These individuals reside on the networking side simply because at some point they are forced to understand why protocols are not working as expected.
It is even rarer to find an individual that understands the interaction of radio systems, networking and security. This skill set needs to be developed and is also greatly needed by DoD.

7. Example Problems
Who controls the key management and distribution? Where does this system reside? How are keys distributed?
Who controls security policy management and distribution? Where does this system reside? How is policy distributed?
What are the hardware systems reset policies? One may suspect that they will be different for manned spacecraft versus unmanned spacecraft.
Do I have a back-channel for when I lock myself out of a system either by misconfigured security policy or misconfigured static routing or misconfigured radios? Is that back channel via a virtual circuit of a different radio system? One may suspect that this will be different for manned spacecraft versus unmanned spacecraft.
Do I always have to encrypt my RF links, or during off-nominal operations can I revert to unencrypted links?
Is this network to operate only in the closed IONET or should the design allow for International operations – this highly effects implementation and security.
What risks is NASA willing to take regarding flight hardware and software certification for manned and unmanned operations?
Do I need 24/7 communication for manned missions, or do we need to learn how to operated in autonomously?

8. Items Requiring Immediate Attention
Off-nominal voice-over-IP concepts
Domain Named Services in space environments
Security Certificate and Policy management and distribution in space environment
Utility of Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking for Space
Deployment of Multicasting in extreme environments for commanding (effectively flood routing)
The utility (or lack thereof) of Policy-base routing in multi-homed systems
Blind Commanding
Predictive Routing
Security, Security, Security
Dynamic Routing in space (including MANET)
Mobile-IP for space
Effects of delays and bit-error-rates on various protocols – particularly with an IPsec security overlay
Utility of various radio systems
Robust communication hardware architectures (what is the most robust way to put together antennas, up/down-converters, interface cards, routing devices and security hardware).

9. Conceptual Lunar Communications Architecture
How does one
address (IP addresses)
this network?
Who controls the
addresses?

10. International Interoperability
It’s all about security!
Today’s NASA claims International Interoperability
For the most part it is at the data-link layer and below
Or, at the Federal Express layer.
Mission Planning and Scheduling service must be implemented.
A framework for such exists as part of the SLE, but has more to do with scheduling assets than extending the space link.
Full interoperability means forward and return data is actually transmitted though systems owned and operated by various entities
This has an enormous security implications