Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng
The electric power industry's view: unified standards for the information superhighway.
Skelton, R., "Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng", RFC 1673, DOI 10.17487/RFC1673, August 1994, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1673>.
@misc{rfc1673,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 1673,
howpublished = {RFC 1673},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC1673},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1673},
author = {R. Skelton},
title = {{Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng}},
pagetotal = 4,
year = 1994,
month = aug,
} RFC text
Contents
Network Working Group R. Skelton
Request for Comments: 1673 EPRI
Category: Informational August 1994
Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng
Status of this Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo
does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
this memo is unlimited.
Abstract
This document was submitted to the IETF IPng area in response to RFC
1550. Publication of this document does not imply acceptance by the
IPng area of any ideas expressed within. Comments should be
submitted to the big-internet@munnari.oz.au mailing list.
Executive Summary
The question of the future of the Internet protocol (IP) is an issue
of national if not international concern. It is critical to the
building of a National Information Infrastructure, comparable to the
adoption of basic standards for the industrial era such as railways,
highways and electricity.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is a non-profit
organization, with 700 voluntary utility members, managing a
technical research and development program for the electric utility
industry to improve power production, distribution and use. The
electric power industry is a major user of computing and
communications and is fully committed to open systems.
While the industry is today a heavy user of the Internet Protocol
Suite (IPS) it is following a long term strategy based on
international standards developed by ISO and CCITT and national
standards developed by the IEEE, ANSI and other standards bodies that
employ formal review and voting procedures.
This strategy is based on a survey of needs in all aspects of the
electrical power supply enterprise. It concluded that these needs
are met more effectively by the current suite of OSI protocols and
international standards under development. Therefore, EPRI developed
the Utility Communications Architecture (UCA) specification for
communications and the Database Access Integrated Services
specification for data exchange both based on the OSI model and
international standards.
These specifications have been incorporated into the Industry
Government Open Systems Specification (IGOSS). They are receiving
favorable response and application by the industry and its suppliers
as well as the support of the natural gas and waterworks industries.
The issues facing the Internet community concerning growth and the
address and routing limitations of IP in particular, provide an ideal
opportunity for creating the national uniform information transport
superhighway. This is critical to the NII Agenda and the only
proposal that will achieve this goal is one that is acceptable from
both private and public sector viewpoints with both a national and an
international perspective.
EPRI also believes it is critically important that new requirements
need to be achieved by convergence of efforts to develop additional
standards. Security, directory services, network management, and the
ability to support real-time applications are four examples of where
new convergent standards efforts are required.
Just as society could not in the past accept multiple standards for
the gauge of the nation's railways, we can no longer accept multiple
standards for information transport.
Engineering Considerations
1. Mandatory Requirement.
Inter networking must evolve to provide an industrial strength
computing and communications environment for multiple uses of
globally connected network resources. Specifically the underlying
transport must provide high integrity support for upper layer
industrial OSI applications including but not limited to MMS and
TP. Use of interface layers such as RFC 1006 is not acceptable
except as a transition strategy.
2. Basic Requirements.
- Scaleability
The addressing scheme must have essentially an unlimited address
space to encompass an arbitrarily large number of information
objects. Specifically it must solve the fundamental limitations
of 32 bit formats, a format for 20 octets and above is considered
suitable.
- Routing table economy
Network addressing must achieve significant economy in routing
database size with very large networks.
- Support for the existing Internet
The existing internetworking paradigm and existing OSI and IPS
applications are to be supported.
3. Key Engineering Considerations - A pragmatic solution.
- Available now
The solution must be available now using mature, internationally
agreed standards and off-the-shelf implementations for hosts and
routers. The solution must leverage existing investments in
standards development, deployment and experience while at the
same time provide for all basic requirements.
- Ease of Transition
Any solution must provide an evolutionary transition path using
an OSI.
- IP dual network layer strategy.
This must be achievable without modifications to existing
inter-domain routing protocols while providing the ability to
support proprietary protocols such as IPX and Appletalk. The
scheme must provide the ability to encompass other addressing
schemes such as X.121 and E.164. Existing SNMP and CMIP MIBs
must be applicable and available. Internet domain names need
to be retained.
- Routing effectiveness
This key objective requires features such as route aggregation,
service selection, and low frequency host advertisements; host
routing intelligence should not be required.
- Flexible Efficient Administration
Operational needs will need to be met in an economic and
flexible manner. Addressing allocations can be either
geographically based or based on carrier ID or both and will be
administered by policy not network topology. Simplified and
robust configurability is required which includes the ability to
identify resources e.g., multi-homed hosts and applications,
instead of interfaces.
- Mobility
Dynamic addressing is required where hosts have the ability to
learn their own network address with the minimum of human
intervention.
Security Considerations
Security isses are not discussed in this memo.
Author's Address
Ron Skelton
Member of Technical Staff
Advanced IT Group
Electric Power Research Institute
Palo Alto CA 94303
EMail: RSKELTON@msm.epri.com
AI ELI5
On this page
§1EPRI's Position on IPng
The Electric Power Research Institute, a non-profit research organization with 700 utility members, submitted RFC 1673 to the IETF IPng area. EPRI represents the electric power industry's needs. The RFC argues that the choice of IPng is critical to building a national information infrastructure comparable to past basic standards like railways and electricity itself.
EPRI acknowledges that the power industry is a heavy user of the Internet Protocol Suite, but notes that its long-term strategy is based on formal international standards (ISO, CCITT, IEEE, ANSI) rather than the more informal IETF process. EPRI has developed the Utility Communications Architecture (UCA) specification and the Industry Government Open Systems Specification (IGOSS), both based on OSI protocols.
The power industry uses the Internet today, but prefers carefully vetted international standards because they need things to be very reliable and predictable.
§2Engineering Considerations
EPRI's mandatory requirement is that IPng provide industrial-strength computing and communications for upper-layer OSI applications. Transport mechanisms like RFC 1006 (TCP/IP over OSI) are only acceptable as a transition strategy, not as a long-term solution.
Basic requirements include scaleability with an essentially unlimited address space (20 octets or larger, well beyond IPv4's 32 bits), routing table economy in very large networks, and support for existing Internet and OSI applications. Key engineering considerations emphasize using available, mature, internationally agreed standards with off-the-shelf implementations.
The power industry needs addresses that can grow forever, fast routing in huge networks, and the ability to use proven standards that are already implemented in real products.
§3A Pragmatic Solution
EPRI proposes an evolutionary transition using OSI rather than a revolutionary change. A dual-network-layer strategy should allow operation without modifying existing inter-domain routing, while supporting proprietary protocols (IPX, AppleTalk) and other addressing schemes (X.121, E.164).
Additional requirements include route aggregation and service selection for routing effectiveness, flexible administration that can be geographically based or carrier-based, simplified configuration, and dynamic addressing to minimize manual intervention. The standard should support multi-homed hosts and applications, not just interfaces.
The new Internet should work alongside existing networks, support different addressing styles, and let organizations set it up flexibly for their own needs.
§4EPRI's Vision
EPRI emphasizes that multiple competing standards cannot be sustained indefinitely—just as railways needed a uniform gauge. The organization sees IPng as an ideal opportunity to create a unified transport superhighway but believes convergence should happen through formal, internationally accepted standards rather than proprietary innovation.
EPRI also highlights the need for convergent standards efforts in security, directory services, network management, and real-time application support.
One standard is better than many, and that standard should come from careful international agreement, not just one organization's innovation.