Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA
Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA
Local Area Networks (LANs) in Aircraft - FTP Directory Listing - FAA
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
2.1 NOTIONAL NETWORKED AIRCRAFT ARCHITECTURE.<br />
Network<strong>in</strong>g aircraft with the NAS is symptomatic of larger societal changes that are aris<strong>in</strong>g from<br />
the emergence of the worldwide Internet network of networks. The Internet has had a profound<br />
impact upon many aspects of modern life. Many bus<strong>in</strong>esses have redef<strong>in</strong>ed their relationships<br />
with other bus<strong>in</strong>esses, <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly bas<strong>in</strong>g them upon Internet-oriented electronic commerce<br />
technologies. The public has also embraced the Internet, as witnessed by the grow<strong>in</strong>g ubiquity<br />
of Internet services such as the worldwide web, <strong>in</strong>stant messag<strong>in</strong>g, and electronic mail with<strong>in</strong><br />
popular culture. Perhaps because of this, many aircraft manufacturers are plann<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>in</strong>stall<br />
onboard networks enabl<strong>in</strong>g passenger access to the Internet. However, if an aircraft<br />
manufacturer opts to have an onboard network that is available to both passengers and avionics<br />
equipment (i.e., a shared LAN), aircraft safety and security concerns arise. As previously<br />
mentioned <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>troduction, parallel, evolutionary changes to the NAS <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly are be<strong>in</strong>g<br />
proposed that rely upon greater <strong>in</strong>tegration between air-based and ground-based airspace<br />
systems. For example, the operational <strong>in</strong>tegration of aircraft with the NAS’ communication and<br />
logistics <strong>in</strong>frastructure promises dramatic improvements <strong>in</strong> operational efficiency. Thus, a<br />
variety of motivations are <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g the connectivity of aircraft systems to air-based and<br />
ground-based network <strong>in</strong>frastructures.<br />
Current commercial aircraft systems and networks can be grouped <strong>in</strong> three major categories:<br />
closed, private, and public. The closed networks are representative of safety-critical avionics<br />
systems; private systems represent airl<strong>in</strong>e operational systems, cab<strong>in</strong> management systems, etc;<br />
open systems are represented by public Internet services offered to passengers.<br />
Several changes have been proposed for next generation of aircraft due to the use of local area<br />
network<strong>in</strong>g technologies. In response to these proposed changes, some projects have been<br />
<strong>in</strong>itiated <strong>in</strong> which the common onboard network is designed with partition<strong>in</strong>g protections. The<br />
assured robustness of the proposed partition<strong>in</strong>g is a concern, from both a security and safety<br />
perspective. Previous avionics systems have had their own data bus and have not been<br />
accessible by nonavionics systems. Security has historically been enforced by a total lack of<br />
access (i.e., an air gap) between systems. However, as this paradigm changes to support<br />
common networked systems, the safety and security aspects of the onboard network must be<br />
addressed by identify<strong>in</strong>g the result<strong>in</strong>g risks and establish<strong>in</strong>g appropriate controls to mitigate<br />
those risks.<br />
Several notional views of the current and future aircraft networked systems have been<br />
formulated. Figure 1 shows one of those views. In figure 1, the current (exist<strong>in</strong>g) architecture is<br />
shown on the left side, a logical picture of the proposed target architecture is <strong>in</strong> the middle, and a<br />
list of changes to achieve the target (future) architecture is enumerated on the right. As<br />
previously mentioned, a key feature of the exist<strong>in</strong>g architecture is its air gap between airborne<br />
functions and passenger Internet services. Thus, there is no way a passenger or entities with<strong>in</strong><br />
9