Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                   E. Birrane, III
Request for Comments: 9657                                       JHU/APL
Category: Informational                                          N. Kuhn
ISSN: 2070-1721                                      Thales Alenia Space
                                                                  Y. Qu
                                                 Futurewei Technologies
                                                              R. Taylor
                                                   Aalyria Technologies
                                                               L. Zhang
                                                                 Huawei
                                                           October 2024


                 Time-Variant Routing (TVR) Use Cases

Abstract

  This document introduces use cases where Time-Variant Routing (TVR)
  computations (i.e., routing computations that take into consideration
  time-based or scheduled changes to a network) could improve routing
  protocol convergence and/or network performance.

Status of This Memo

  This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
  published for informational purposes.

  This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
  (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
  received public review and has been approved for publication by the
  Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
  approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of Internet
  Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

  Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
  and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9657.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
  document authors.  All rights reserved.

  This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
  Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
  (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
  publication of this document.  Please review these documents
  carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
  to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
  include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
  Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
  in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

  1.  Introduction
  2.  Resource Preservation
    2.1.  Assumptions
    2.2.  Routing Impacts
    2.3.  Example
  3.  Operating Efficiency
    3.1.  Assumptions
    3.2.  Routing Impacts
    3.3.  Example: Cellular Network
    3.4.  Another Example: Tidal Network
  4.  Dynamic Reachability
    4.1.  Assumptions
    4.2.  Routing Impacts
    4.3.  Example: Mobile Satellites
    4.4.  Another Example: Predictable Moving Vessels
  5.  Security Considerations
  6.  IANA Considerations
  7.  Informative References
  Acknowledgments
  Authors' Addresses

1.  Introduction

  There is a growing number of use cases where changes to the routing
  topology are an expected part of network operations.  In these use
  cases, the pre-planned loss and restoration of an adjacency, or
  formation of an alternate adjacency, should be seen as a
  nondisruptive event.

  Expected changes to topologies can occur for a variety of reasons.
  In networks with mobile nodes, such as unmanned aerial vehicles and
  some orbiting spacecraft constellations, links are lost and re-
  established as a function of the mobility of the platforms.  In
  networks without reliable access to power, such as networks
  harvesting energy from wind and solar, link activity might be
  restricted to certain times of day.  Similarly, in networks
  prioritizing green computing and energy efficiency over data rate,
  network traffic might be planned around energy costs or expected user
  data volumes.

  This document defines three categories of use cases where a route
  computation might beneficially consider time information.  Each of
  these use cases are included as follows:

  1.  An overview of the use case describing how route computations
      might select different paths (or subpaths) as a function of time.

  2.  A set of assumptions made by the use case as to the nature of the
      network and data exchange.

  3.  Specific discussion on the routing impacts of the use case.

  4.  Example networks conformant to the use case.

  The use cases that are considered in this document are as follows:

  1.  Resource Preservation (described in Section 2), where there is
      information about link availability over time at the client
      level.  Time-Variant Routing (TVR) can utilize the predictability
      of the link availability to optimize network connectivity by
      taking into account endpoint resource preservation.

  2.  Operating Efficiency (described in Section 3), where there is a
      server cost or a path cost usage varying over time.  TVR can
      exploit the predictability of the path cost to optimize the cost
      of the system exploitation.  The notion of a path cost is
      extended to be a time-dependent function instead of a constant.

  3.  Dynamic Reachability (described in Section 4), where there is
      information about link availability variation between nodes in
      the end-to-end path.  TVR can exploit the predictability of the
      link availability to optimize in-network routing.

  The document does not intend to represent the full set of cases where
  TVR computations could beneficially impact network performance -- new
  use cases are expected to be generated over time.  Similarly, the
  concrete examples within each use case are meant to provide an
  existence proof of the use case and not to present any exhaustive
  enumeration of potential examples.  It is likely that multiple
  example networks exist that could be claimed as instances of any
  given use case.

  The document focuses on deterministic scenarios.  Non-deterministic
  scenarios, such as vehicle-to-vehicle communication, are out of the
  scope of the document.

2.  Resource Preservation

  Some nodes in a network might operate in resource-constrained
  environments or otherwise with limited internal resources.
  Constraints, such as available power, thermal ranges, and on-board
  storage, can all impact the instantaneous operation of a node.  In
  particular, resource management on such a node can require that
  certain functionality be powered on (or off) to extend the ability of
  the node to participate in the network.

  When power on a node is running low, noncritical functions on the
  node might be turned off in favor of extending node life.
  Alternatively, certain functions on a node may be turned off to allow
  the node to use available power to respond to an event, such as data
  collection.  When a node is in danger of violating a thermal
  constraint, normal processing might be paused in favor of a
  transition to a thermal safe mode until a regular operating condition
  is reestablished.  When local storage resources run low, a node might
  choose to expend power resources to compress, delete, or transmit
  data off the node to free up space for future data collection.  There
  might also be cases where a node experiences a planned offline state
  to save and accumulate power.

  In addition to power, thermal, and storage, other resource
  constraints may exist on a node such that the preservation of
  resources is necessary to preserve the existence (and proper
  function) of the node in the network.  Nodes operating in these
  conditions might benefit from TVR computations as the connectivity of
  the node changes over time as part of node preservation.

2.1.  Assumptions

  To effectively manage on-board functionality based on available
  resources, a node must comprehend specific aspects concerning the
  utilization and replenishment of resources.  It is expected that
  patterns of the environment, device construction, and operational
  configuration exist with enough regularity and stability to allow
  meaningful planning.  The following assumptions are made with this
  use case:

  1.  Known resource expenditures.  It is assumed that there exists
      some determinable relationship between the resources available on
      a node and the resources needed to participate in a network.  A
      node would need to understand when it has met some condition for
      participating in, or dropping out of, a network.  This is
      somewhat similar to predicting the amount of battery life left on
      a laptop as a function of likely future usage.

  2.  Predictable resource accumulation.  It is assumed that the
      accumulation of resources on a node are predictable such that a
      node might expect (and be able to communicate) when it is likely
      to next rejoin a network.  This is similar to predicting the time
      at which a battery on a laptop will be fully charged.

  3.  Consistent cost functions.  It is assumed that resource
      management on a node is deterministic such that the management of
      a node as a function of resource expenditure and accumulation is
      consistent enough for link planning.

2.2.  Routing Impacts

  Resource management in these scenarios might involve turning off
  elements of the node as part of on-board resource management.  These
  activities can affect data routing in a variety of ways.

  1.  Power Savings.  On-board radios may be turned off to allow other
      node processing.  This may happen on power-constrained devices to
      extend the battery life of the node or to allow a node to perform
      some other power-intensive task.

  2.  Thermal Savings.  On-board radios may be turned off if there are
      thermal considerations on the node, such as an increase in a
      node's operating temperature.

  3.  Storage Savings.  On-board radios may be turned on with the
      purpose of transmitting data off the node to free local storage
      space to collect new data.

  Whenever a communications device on a node changes its powered state
  there is the possibility (if the node is within range of other nodes
  in a network) that the topology of the network is changed, which
  impacts route calculations through the network.  Additionally,
  whenever a node joins a network there may be a delay between the
  joining of the node to the network and any discovery that may take
  place relating to the status of the node's functional neighborhood.
  During these times, forwarding to and from the node might be delayed
  pending some synchronization.

2.3.  Example

  An illustrative example of a network necessitating resource
  preservation is an energy-harvesting wireless sensor network.  In
  such a network, nodes rely exclusively on environmental sources for
  power, such as solar panels.  On-board power levels may fluctuate
  based on various factors including sensor activity, processing
  demands, and the node's position and orientation relative to its
  energy source.

  Consider a simple three-node network where each node accumulates
  power through solar panels.  Power available for radio frequency (RF)
  transmission is shown in Figure 1.  In this figure, each of the three
  nodes (Node 1, Node 2, and Node 3) has a different plot of available
  power over time.  This example assumes that a node will not power its
  radio until available power is over some threshold, which is shown by
  the horizontal line on each plot.

           Node 1                   Node 2                   Node 3
P |                      P |   -------            P |          --
o |  ----       --       o |  /       \           o |         /  \
w |~/~~~~\~~~~~/~~\~~    w |~/~~~~~~~~~\~~~~~~    w |~~~~~~~~/~~~~\~~~~
e |/      \   /    \     e |/           \         e |       /      \
r |        ---      -    r |             -----    r |-------        ---
  +---++----++----++-      +---++----++----++-      +---++----++----++-
      t1    t2    t3           t1    t2    t3           t1    t2    t3
           Time                     Time                     Time

                    Figure 1: Node Power over Time

  The connectivity of this three-node network changes over time in ways
  that may be predictable and are likely able to be communicated to
  other nodes in this small sensor network.  Examples of connectivity
  are shown in Figure 2.  This figure shows a sample of network
  connectivity at three times: t1, t2, and t3.

  *  At time t1, Node 1 and Node 2 have their radios powered on and are
     expected to communicate.

  *  At time t2, it is expected that Node 1 has its radio off but that
     Node 2 and Node 3 can communicate.

  *  Finally, at time t3, it is expected that Node 1 may be turning its
     radio off, that Node 2 and Node 3 are not powering their radios,
     and there is no expectation of connectivity.

             +----------+        +----------+        +----------+
        t1   |  Node 1  |--------|  Node 2  |        |  Node 3  |
             +----------+        +----------+        +----------+

             +----------+        +----------+        +----------+
        t2   |  Node 1  |        |  Node 2  |--------|  Node 3  |
             +----------+        +----------+        +----------+

             +----------+        +----------+        +----------+
        t3   |  Node 1  |        |  Node 2  |        |  Node 3  |
             +----------+        +----------+        +----------+

                       Figure 2: Topology over Time

3.  Operating Efficiency

  Some nodes in a network might alter their networking behavior to
  optimize metrics associated with the cost of a node's operation.
  While the resource preservation use case described in Section 2
  addresses node survival, this use case discusses non-survival
  efficiencies such as the financial cost to operate the node and the
  environmental impact (cost) of using that node.

  When a node operates using some preexisting infrastructure, there is
  typically some cost associated with the use of that infrastructure.
  Sample costs are included as follows:

  1.  Nodes that use existing wireless communications, such as a
      cellular infrastructure, must pay to communicate to and through
      that infrastructure.

  2.  Nodes supplied with electricity from an energy provider pay for
      the power they use.

  3.  Nodes that cluster computation and activities might increase the
      temperature of the node and incur additional costs associated
      with cooling the node (or collection of nodes).

  4.  Beyond financial costs, assessing the environmental impact of
      operating a node may also be modeled as a cost associated with
      node operation, to include achieving carbon credits or other
      incentives for green computing.

  When the cost of using a node's resources changes over time, a node
  can benefit from predicting when data transmissions might optimize
  costs, environmental impacts, or other metrics associated with
  operation.

3.1.  Assumptions

  The ability to predict the impact of a node's resource utilization
  over time presumes that the node exists within a defined environment
  (or infrastructure).  Some characteristics of these environments are
  listed as follows:

  1.  Cost Measurability.  The impacts of operating a node within its
      environment can be measured in a deterministic way.  For example,
      the cost-per-bit of data over a cellular network or the cost-per-
      kilowatt of energy used are known.

  2.  Cost Predictability.  Changes to the impacts of resource
      utilization are known in advance.  For example, if the cost of
      energy is less expensive in the evening than during the day,
      there exists some way of communicating this change to a node.

  3.  Cost Persistent.  Changes to the cost of operating in the
      environment persist for a sufficient amount of time such that
      behavior can be adjusted in response to changing costs.  If costs
      change too rapidly, it is likely not possible to meaningfully
      react to their change.

  4.  Cost Magnitude.  The magnitude of cost changes is such that a
      node experiences a minimum threshold cost reduction through
      optimization.  A specified time period is designated for
      measuring the cost reduction.

3.2.  Routing Impacts

  Optimizing resource utilization can affect route computation in ways
  similar to those experienced with resource preservation.  The route
  computation may not change the available path, but the topology as
  seen by an endpoint would be different.  Cost optimization can impact
  route calculation in a variety of ways, some of which are described
  as follows:

  1.  Link Filtering.  Data might be accumulated on a node waiting for
      a cost-effective time for data transmission.  Individual link
      costs might be annotated with cost information such that
      adjacencies with a too high cost might not be used for
      forwarding.  This effectively filters which adjacencies are used
      (possibly as a function of the type of data being routed).

  2.  Burst Planning.  In cases where there is a cost savings
      associated with fewer longer transmissions (versus many smaller
      transmissions), nodes might refuse to forward data until a
      sufficient data volume exists to justify a transmission.

  3.  Environmental Measurement.  Nodes that measure the quality of
      individual links can compute the overall cost of using a link as
      a function of the signal strength of the link.  If link quality
      is insufficient due to environmental conditions (such as clouds
      on a free-space optical link or long distance RF transmission in
      a storm) the cost required to communicate over the link may be
      too much, even if access to infrastructure is otherwise in a less
      expensive time of day.

  In each of these cases, some consideration of the efficiency of
  transmission is prioritized over achieving a particular data rate.
  Waiting until data rate costs are lower takes advantage of platforms
  using time-of-use rate plans -- both for pay-as-you-go data and
  associated energy costs.  Accumulating data volumes and choosing more
  opportune times to transmit can also result in less energy
  consumption by radios and, thus, less operating cost for platforms.

3.3.  Example: Cellular Network

  One example of a network where nodes might seek to optimize operating
  cost is a set of nodes operating over cellular connections that
  charge both peak and off-peak data rates.  In this case, individual
  nodes may be allocated a fixed set of "peak" minutes such that
  exceeding that amount of time results in expensive overage charges.
  Generally, the concept of peak and off-peak minutes exists to deter
  the use of a given network at times when the cellular network is
  likely to encounter heavy call volumes (such as during the workday).

  Just as pricing information can act as a deterrent (or incentive) for
  a human cellular user, this pricing information can be codified in
  ways that also allow machine-to-machine (M2M) connections to
  prioritize off-peak communications for certain types of data
  exchange.  Many M2M traffic exchanges involve schedulable activities,
  such as nightly bulk file transfers, pushing software updates,
  synchronizing datastores, and sending noncritical events and logs.
  These activities are usually already scheduled to minimize impact on
  businesses and customers but can also be scheduled to minimize
  overall cost.

  Consider a simple three-node network, similar to the one pictured in
  Figure 1, except that in this case the resource that varies over time
  is the cost of the data exchange.  This case is illustrated below in
  Figure 3.  In this figure, a series of three plots are given, one for
  each of the three nodes (Node 1, Node 2, and Node 3).  Each of these
  nodes exists in a different cellular service area that has different
  peak and off-peak data rate times.  This is shown in each figure by
  times when the cost is low (off-peak) and when the cost is high
  (peak).

  Node 1                 Node 2                  Node 3

C |       +---------   C |--+                  C |-------------+
o |       |            o |  |                  o |             |
s |       |            s |  |                  s |             |
t |-------+            t |  +----------------  t |             +-------
  |                      |                       |
  +---++----++----++--   +----++----++----++--   +----++----++-----++--
      t1    t2    t3          t1    t2    t3          t1    t2     t3
           Time                    Time                    Time

                    Figure 3: Data Cost over Time

  Given the presumption that peak times are known in advance, the cost
  of data exchange from Node 1 through Node 2 to Node 3 can be
  calculated.  Examples of these data exchanges are shown in Figure 4.
  From this figure, both times t1 and t3 result in a smaller cost of
  data exchange than choosing to communicate data at time t2.

         +-----------+          +-----------+          +-----------+
    t1   |  Node N1  |---LOW----|  Node N2  |---HIGH---|  Node N3  |
         +-----------+          +-----------+          +-----------+

         +-----------+          +-----------+          +-----------+
    t2   |  Node N1  |---HIGH---|  Node N2  |---HIGH---|  Node N3  |
         +-----------+          +-----------+          +-----------+

         +-----------+          +-----------+          +-----------+
    t3   |  Node N1  |---HIGH---|  Node N2  |----LOW---|  Node N3  |
         +-----------+          +-----------+          +-----------+

                  Figure 4: Data Exchange Cost over Time

  While not possible in every circumstance, a highly optimized plan
  could be to communicate from Node 1 to Node 2 at time t1 and then
  queue data at Node 2 until time t3 for delivery to Node 3.  This case
  is shown in Figure 5.

         +-----------+          +-----------+
    t1   |  Node N1  |---LOW----|  Node N2  |
         +-----------+          +-----------+
                                +-----------+          +-----------+
    t3                          |  Node N2  |----LOW---|  Node N3  |
                                +-----------+          +-----------+

                    Figure 5: Data Cost Using Storage

3.4.  Another Example: Tidal Network

  Another example related to operating efficiency is often referred to
  as a "tidal network," in which traffic volume undergoes significant
  fluctuations at different times.  Take, for instance, a campus
  network, where thousands of individuals go to classrooms and
  libraries during the daytime and retire to the dormitories at night.
  This results in a regular oscillation of network traffic across
  various locations within the campus.

  In the context of a tidal network scenario, energy-saving methods may
  include the deactivation of some or all components of network nodes.
  These activities have the potential to alter network topology and
  impact data routing in a variety of ways.  Ports on network nodes can
  be selectively disabled or enabled based on traffic patterns, thereby
  reducing the energy consumption of nodes during periods of low
  network traffic.

  More information on tidal networks can be found in [TIDAL].

4.  Dynamic Reachability

  When a node is placed on a mobile platform, the mobility of the
  platform (and thus the mobility of the node) may cause changes to the
  topology of the network over time.  The impacts on the dynamics of
  the topology can be very important.  To the extent that the relative
  mobility between and among nodes in the network and the impacts of
  the environment on the signal propagation can be predicted, the
  associated loss and establishment of adjacencies can also be planned
  for.

  Mobility can cause the loss of an adjacent link in several ways, such
  as that which follows:

  1.  Node mobility can cause the distance between two nodes to become
      large enough that distance-related attenuation causes the mobile
      node to lose connectivity with one or more other nodes in the
      network.

  2.  Node mobility can also be used to maintain a required distance
      from other mobile nodes in the network.  While moving, external
      characteristics may cause the loss of links through occultation
      or other hazards of traversing a shared environment.

  3.  Node mobility can cause the distance between two nodes to vary
      quickly over time, making it complicated to establish and
      maintain connectivity.

  4.  Nodes equipped with communication terminals capable of adjusting
      their orientation or moving behind and emerging from barriers
      will also establish and lose connectivity with other nodes as a
      function of that motion.

  Mobile nodes, like any node, may encounter issues regarding resource
  preservation and cost efficiency.  In addition, they may face unique
  challenges associated with their mobility.  The intermittent
  availability of links can lead to dynamic neighbor relationships at
  the node level.  This use case aims to examine the routing
  implications of motion-induced changes to network topology.

4.1.  Assumptions

  Predicting the impact of node mobility on route computation requires
  some information relating to the nature of the mobility and the
  nature of the environment being moved through.  Some information
  presumed to exist for planning is listed as follows:

  1.  Path Predictability.  The path of a mobile node through its
      environment is known (or can be predicted) as a function of (at
      least) time.  It is presumed that mobile nodes using TVR
      algorithms would not exhibit purely random motion.

  2.  Environmental Knowledge.  When otherwise well-connected mobile
      nodes pass through certain elements of their environment (such as
      a storm, a tunnel, or the horizon), they may lose connectivity.
      The duration of this connectivity loss is assumed to be
      calculable as a function of node mobility and the environment
      itself.

4.2.  Routing Impacts

  Changing a network topology affects the computation of paths (or
  subpaths) through that topology.  In particular, the following
  features can be implemented in a network with mobile nodes such that
  different paths might be computed over time:

  1.  Adjacent Link Expiration.  A node might be able to predict that
      an adjacency will expire as a function of that node's mobility,
      the other node's mobility, or some characteristic of the
      environment.  Determining that an adjacency has expired allows a
      route computation to plan for that loss rather than default to an
      error recovery mechanism.

  2.  Adjacent Link Resumption.  Just as the loss of an adjacency can
      be predicted, it may be possible to predict when an adjacency
      will resume.

  3.  Data Rate Adjustments.  The achievable data rate over a given
      link is not constant over time and may vary significantly as a
      function of both relative mobility between a transmitter and
      receiver as well as the environment being transmitted through.
      Knowledge of both mobility and environmental state may allow for
      prediction of data rates, which may impact path computation.

  4.  Adjacent Link Filtering.  Separate from the instantaneous
      presence or absence of an adjacency, a route computation might
      choose to not use an adjacency if that adjacency is likely to
      expire in the near future or if it is likely to experience a
      significant drop in predicted data rate.

4.3.  Example: Mobile Satellites

  A relatively new type of mobile network that has emerged over the
  past several years is the Low Earth Orbit (LEO) networked
  constellation.  There are a number of such constellations being built
  by both private industry and governments.  While this example
  describes LEO satellite systems, the mobility events can be applied
  to satellite systems orbiting at different altitudes (including Very
  LEO (V-LEO) or Medium Earth Orbit (MEO)).

  Many LEO networked constellations have a similar operational concept
  of hundreds to thousands of inexpensive spacecraft that can
  communicate both with their orbital neighbors as well as down to any
  ground station that they happen to be passing over.  A ground station
  is a facility used to communicate with satellites in LEO.  The
  relationship between an individual spacecraft and an individual
  ground station becomes somewhat complex as each spacecraft may only
  be over a single ground station for a few minutes at a time.
  Moreover, as a function of the constellation topology, there are
  scenarios where (1) the inter-satellite links need to be shut down
  for interference avoidance purposes or (2) the network topology
  changes, which modifies the neighbors of a given spacecraft.

  A LEO networked constellation represents a good example of planned
  mobility based on the predictability of spacecraft in orbit.  While
  other mobile vehicles may encounter unpredictable fluctuations in
  velocity, spacecraft operate in an environment with relatively stable
  velocity conditions.  This determinism makes them an excellent
  candidate for TVR computations.  However, inter-satellite link
  failures could still introduce unpredictability in the network
  topology.

  Consider three spacecraft (N1, N2, and N3) following each other
  sequentially in the same orbit.  This is sometimes called a "string
  of pearls" configuration.  Spacecraft N2 always maintains
  connectivity to its two neighbor spacecraft: N1, which is behind in
  the orbit, and N3, which is ahead in the orbit.  This configuration
  is illustrated in Figure 6.  While these spacecraft are all mobile,
  their relative mobility ensures continuous contact with each other
  under normal conditions.

         .--.                     .--.                     .--.
   ####-| N1 |-####  <--->  ####-| N2 |-####  <--->  ####-| N3 |-####
         \__/                     \__/                     \__/

                  Figure 6: Three Sequential Spacecraft

  Flying over a ground station imposes a non-relative motion between
  the ground and the spacecraft -- namely that any given ground station
  will only be in view of the spacecraft for a short period of time.
  The times at which each spacecraft can see the ground station is
  shown in the plots in Figure 7.  In this figure, ground contact is
  shown when the plot is high, and a lack of ground contact is shown
  when the graph is low.  From this, we see that spacecraft N3 can see
  ground at time t1, N2 sees ground at time t2, and spacecraft N1 sees
  ground at time t3.

      Spacecraft N1           Spacecraft N2            Spacecraft N3
G |                     G |                      G |
r |              +--+   r |         +--+         r |   +--+
o |              |  |   o |         |  |         o |   |  |
u |              |  |   u |         |  |         u |   |  |
n |--------------+  +-  n |---------+  +-------  n |---+  +-------------
d |                     d |                      d |
 +---++----++----++--    +----++----++----++--    +----++----++----++--
     t1    t2    t3           t1    t2    t3           t1    t2    t3
          Time                     Time                     Time

           Figure 7: Spacecraft Ground Contacts over Time

  Since the ground station in this example is stationary, each
  spacecraft will pass over it, resulting in a change to the network
  topology.  This topology change is shown in Figure 8.  At time t1,
  any message residing on N3 and destined for the ground could be
  forwarded directly to the ground station.  At time t2, that same
  message would need to, instead, be forwarded to N2 and then forwarded
  to ground.  By time t3, the same message would need to be forwarded
  from N2 to N1 and then down to ground.

       +------+          +------+
   t1  |  N2  |----------|  N3  |
       +------+          +---+--+
                             |
                            /|\
                           \___/
                            / \
                          Ground
                          Station
   ------------------------------------------------------------------
       +------+          +------+          +------+
   t2  |  N1  |----------|  N2  |----------|  N3  |
       +------+          +---+--+          +------+
                             |
                            /|\
                           \___/
                            / \
                          Ground
                          Station
   ------------------------------------------------------------------
                         +------+          +------+          +------+
   t3                    |  N1  |----------|  N2  |----------|  N3  |
                         +---+--+          +------+          +------+
                             |
                            /|\
                           \___/
                            / \
                          Ground
                          Station
   ------------------------------------------------------------------

                Figure 8: Constellation Topology over Time

  This example focuses on the case where the spacecrafts fly over a
  ground station and introduce changes in the network topology.  There
  are also scenarios where the in-constellation network topology varies
  over time following a deterministic time-driven operation from the
  ground system.  More information on in-constellation network topology
  can be found in [SAT-CONSTELLATION] and [SCN].  For this example, and
  in particular for within constellation network topology changes, the
  TVR approach is important to avoid the Interior Gateway Protocol
  (IGP) issues mentioned in [SAT-CONSTELLATION].

4.4.  Another Example: Predictable Moving Vessels

  Another relevant example for this use case involves the movement of
  vessels with predictable trajectories, such as ferries or planes.
  These endpoints often rely on a combination of satellite and
  terrestrial systems for Internet connectivity, capitalizing on their
  predictable journeys.

  This scenario also covers situations where nodes employ dynamic
  pointing solutions to track the mobility of other nodes.  In such
  cases, nodes dynamically adjust their antennas and application
  settings to determine the optimal timing for data transmission along
  the path.

5.  Security Considerations

  While this document does not define a specific mechanism or solution,
  it serves to motivate the use of time-based validation and revocation
  strategies.  Therefore, security considerations are anticipated to be
  addressed elsewhere, such as within a TVR schedule definition or
  through a protocol extension utilizing a TVR schedule.  However, it's
  important to note that time synchronization is critical within a
  network employing a TVR schedule.  Any unauthorized changes to
  network clocks can disrupt network functionality, potentially leading
  to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack.

6.  IANA Considerations

  This document has no IANA actions.

7.  Informative References

  [SAT-CONSTELLATION]
             Han, L., Li, R., Retana, A., Chen, M., Su, L., and T.
             Jiang, "Problems and Requirements of Satellite
             Constellation for Internet", Work in Progress, Internet-
             Draft, draft-lhan-problems-requirements-satellite-net-06,
             4 January 2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
             draft-lhan-problems-requirements-satellite-net-06>.

  [SCN]      Wood, L., "Satellite Constellation Networks",
             Internetworking and Computing over Satellite Networks, pp.
             13-34, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4615-0431-3_2, April 2003,
             <https://link.springer.com/
             chapter/10.1007/978-1-4615-0431-3_2>.

  [TIDAL]    Zhang, L., Zhou, T., Dong, J., and N. Nzima, "Use Case of
             Tidal Network", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
             zzd-tvr-use-case-tidal-network-02, 28 July 2023,
             <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-zzd-tvr-use-
             case-tidal-network-02>.

Acknowledgments

  Many thanks to Tony Li, Peter Ashwood-Smith, Abdussalam Baryun,
  Arashmid Akhavain, Dirk Trossen, Brian Sipos, Alexandre Petrescu,
  Haoyu Song, Hou Dongxu, Tianran Zhou, Jie Dong, Nkosinathi Nzima, and
  Vinton Cerf for their useful comments that helped improve the
  document.

Authors' Addresses

  Edward J. Birrane, III
  JHU/APL
  Email: [email protected]


  Nicolas Kuhn
  Thales Alenia Space
  Email: [email protected]


  Yingzhen Qu
  Futurewei Technologies
  Email: [email protected]


  Rick Taylor
  Aalyria Technologies
  Email: [email protected]


  Li Zhang
  Huawei
  Email: [email protected]