|
Published on 14th February 2008 OverviewMilitary Messages often need to be transferred over low bandwidth networks, in particular HF Radio and Satellite Networks. The two military specifications for this type of messaging environment are NATO's STANAG 4406 Annex E and ACP 142 developed by the CCEB (Combined Communications-Electronics Board – AU, CA, NZ, US, UK). This paper describes scenarios that require these special technologies, and then gives an overview of the technologies and how they address the technical problems. The Technical ChallengesThere are a number of basic technical challenges that arise from military messaging deployments, some of which are particularly relevant to constrained communications channels. These are summarized below and will be illustrated in the scenarios described subsequently.
ScenariosThis section considers a number of scenarios where the technologies described here are important. It is not intended to be an exhaustive list. Surface Fleet Communication
Naval communication is a major target. Although communication could flow from the strategic environment directly to task force ships using broadcast radio, this is not generally the approach used. When ships are deployed as part of a task force, communication will generally go to the designated command ship (usually a larger surface unit with the necessary command, control and communication equipment). At the strategic level, messages may come from a COMCEN (Communications Centre) on shore or directly from originators in the strategic environment. Maximum support of messages direct from originators is desirable. Messages are then relayed onwards to the other ships in the task force, often using the same communications technology as in ship to shore. The above scenario shows use of Satellite to reach the command ship and broadcast HF (high frequency) radio for communication with the other units in the task force. Multicast can be used for communication from the command ship to the other ships. In EMCON, messages can be received from shore or from other vessels, but not transmitted between ships or back to shore. More complex situations may arise with individual vessels in EMCON. In general, a ship would have quite a number of potential internal
message recipients, and the external message communication needs to
be connected with the internal messaging infrastructure. Submarine Communication
Communication with submarines introduces a number of special requirements. Submarines may make use of higher bandwidth channels when they are on the surface. They will also use VLF (very low frequency) radio, which has a data rate of around 300 bits per second. VLF radio has the advantage that it will penetrate below the surface for a moderate distance, and so can be used by a submarine without surfacing. When submarines dive below the level of VLF penetration, they will be out of all communication, and so this leads to three basic states: full communication; EMCON; no communication. These need to be managed, and shore systems will be most effective if they understand the current state of communication, a situation also relevant to the previous scenario. This is achieved by planned timing of communication status, which is shared between submarine and shore. Army Deployment
The army has similar requirements. Typically, there will be high bandwidth communication to field HQ. Communication to field units may be bandwidth constrained, and there may be requirement for EMCON. In some situations, store and forward messaging is useful, for example to send key information (e.g., map data) or to send a formal message in preference to voice communication. In the scenario illustrated above, there is no direct communication from field HQ to a second field unit., but messages can be relayed by use of the messaging system in the first field unit. This relay needs to be fully automated, and not require manual intervention at the first field unit. Special Forces
Another requirement is to support special forces operatives. It will often be desirable or essential to have radio silence (EMCON), but to retain the ability to listen and to receive messages. STANG 4406 and ACP 142 Protocol Architecture
The above diagram shows a STANAG 4406 Annex E messaging architecture, with protocols down to the ACP 142 level. Mappings below ACP 142 to support Satellite and HF Radio are described later. STANAG 4406 MessagingSTANAG 4406 defines a family of protocols to support military messaging, based on the ITU X.400 Standards. STANAG 4406 specifies an end to end message protocol for communicating between a pair of messaging clients, which are referred to as User Agents (UA). This end to end protocol is based on the X.400 P2 Interpersonal Messaging Protocol, extended by the P772 protocol defined in STANAG 4406 that provides enhancements for military service capabilities and military body parts. STANAG 4406 messages are switched by store and forward message switches, which are referred to as Message Transfer Agents (MTA). When MTAs communicate over a high speed network they use the X.400 P1 Protocol, which has a mapping onto TCP/IP referred to as "full stack". The TIA and LMTA are special types of MTA, which are described in more detail later. The diagram above shows MTA and MTA (TIA) communicating using full stack X.400 P1. A UA may communicate directly with an MTA using X.400 P3, or indirectly by a Message Store (MS) using X.400 P7. Both options are shown above. Further information on use of a Message Store is given in the Isode Whitepapaer Why X.400 is good for high reliability messaging. STANAG 4406 Annex ESTANAG 4406 Annex E defines a light weight alternative to (full stack) X.400 P1 for communicating between a pair of MTAs. This is shown in the diagram above, communicating between the MTA (TIA) and MTA (LMTA). STANAG 4406 Annex E specifies operation over ACP 142. which is described below. Annex E uses the core format of X.400 P1, but replaces the “full stack” mapping with a light weight mapping that comprises:
The key functions of Annex E are to reduce to a minimum the amount of data transmitted, and to integrate ACP 142 multicast and EMCON functionality into an X.400 MTA. ACP 142ACP 142 "P_Mul – A Protocol for Reliable Multicast Messaging in Constrained Bandwidth and Delayed Acknowledgement (EMCON) Environments" is a CCEB standard for multicast and EMCON support, specifically designed to support NATO’s STANAG 4406 Annex E. ACP 142 is an end to end protocol, that can map onto various underlying transport mechanisms described later. It works to transfer data reliably from one system, to one or more recipient systems. A brief summary of how it works is as follows:
The details are more complex, but the essence of how ACP 142 works is quite straightforward. It can be seen that ACP 142 provides the core EMCON and multicast functionality needed. LMTA and TIA
Annex E defines protocols and procedures for integrating an X.400 MTA with ACP 142. Annex E defines two basic configurations of MTA.
Isode's M-Switch X.400 can act either as an LMTA or as a TIA. This is a configuration choice, and there is no product difference between TIA and LMTA. Supporting Small SystemsFor a large unit, such as a ship that has multiple users, it is natural for the system to contain an MTA (LMTA or TIA). The MTA will enable local message distribution and give a natural external interface. For small systems, typically supporting only one user, Isode recommends the following architecture:
This approach uses an LMTA on the same machine as the mail client. The LMTA would have a very simple local and routing configuration. The benefits of this approach are:
For a modern platform, and efficient MTA such as Isode M-Switch X.400, there is little functional or system overhead in having an MTA on the local system. Supporting Different NetworksACP 142 and STANAG 4406 Annex E can be used over multiple network technologies. This paper looks at use of Satellite Networks and HF Radio. Satellite NetworksSatellite networks provide IP, and so full stack P1 could be used over TCP/IP. This may be done, but in many situations there are the following advantages to using STANAG 4406 Annex E and ACP 142:
ACP 142 makes use of UDP (User Datagram Protocol) to operate directly over IP. This configuration can work over any IP network, making use of IP multicast. To support multicast, multicast support is necessary in all of the routers used. The example here shows a satellite connection between a pair of routers. This reflects a typical configuration, as in general the MTA will not be connected directly to a satellite router. HF RadioHF Radio is important for military communications, because of its effectively unlimited range. Applications running over HF Radio use STANAG 5066, which is described in the Isode white paper STANAG 5066: The Standard for Data Applications over HF Radio.
The diagram above shows the protocol stack used over HF Radio. The protocol architecture has ACP 142 operating directly over STANAG 5066. This direct mapping is optimized, and handles priority, as the priority of each ACP 142 packet is mapped on STANAG 5066 priority. This is important if multiple applications are operation over one modem/radio.
A key capability of STANAG 5066 is that it enables multiple applications to share a single modem/radio. STANAG 5066 applications connect by a STANAG 5066 standard protocol to a single STANAG 5066 server associated with the modem/radio. This also allows the application to run on a different computer and connect to the STANAG 5066 server over TCP/IP. This is convenient for large deployments. For small deployments, all components may run on a single system. Handling Multiple Communication ChannelsThe paper so far has primarily considered use of a single constrained bandwidth communication channel. This section shows that many real deployments have multiple communication channels.
A ship will typically have two or more communication channels: HF Radio and Satellite. The combinations in use will depend on threats:
When both channels are open, use of Satellite may be preferred (higher bandwidth) or use of HF radio (lower cost), or a more complex preference dependent on messaging load. With a headquarters unit, the EMCON status is simpler (as it would never be in EMCON), but there may be many more channels, for example to support multiple satellites with different ships reached through different satellite services. Other shore based systems, such as Special Operations could be in EMCON. It can be seen that these multi-channel scenarios add some significant complexity. Multi-Hop RoutingThe initial scenarios showed situations where a message needs to be sent from TIA to LMTA and then on to another LMTA. This multi-hop routing can be important where there is not direct connectivity from TIA to an LMTA. A good STANAG 4406 Annex E solution should support multi-hop routing. Further ReadingThis paper has described STANAG 4406 Annex E from a scenario and protocol architecture perspective. Another Isode white paper, Packaging Military Messaging for HF Radio and other Low Bandwidth Links provides a different perspective, looking at hardware and how component products are grouped together. What Isode ProvidesIsode's military messaging solution is summarized on the web page: Military Message Handling Systems (MMHS). Details of Isode's product architecture to address STANAG 4406 Annex E and the scenarios described in this document are set out in the Isode white paper The Architecture of Isode’s STANAG 4406 Annex E Solution. ConclusionsThis paper has set out the STANAG 4406 Annex E and ACP 142 technologies, how they are used to support military messaging.
|
|
| Copyright © 2008 Isode | privacy feedback
|