Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk
Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Tue, 04 August 2020 13:26 UTC
Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 6gip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6gip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2F973A0B6D for <6gip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 06:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.722
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.949, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gC0wh-_SYlyv for <6gip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 06:26:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C052F3A0B6E for <6gip@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 06:26:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 074DQTkK014065; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:26:29 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id D1AF1203BCD; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:26:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.13]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C38CE203B8E; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:26:29 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 074DQT1a008230; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:26:29 +0200
To: sarikaya@ieee.org
Cc: 6gip@ietf.org
References: <CAC8QAccg0uh8o8cFtuGf2aN=DrB9WjS=ZPsEHuz+GzdYrYzmOA@mail.gmail.com> <CAC8QAceQpngoCvfTtDx-jGXSmBVyzU6HLpkJQ8sc9_ofm0e7qg@mail.gmail.com> <a01078ac-b597-8cdb-1f4f-e97f99df3800@gmail.com> <CAC8QAceSaPjjoEum_=OH1FaMvzUp1=C5e+-Xozd+uy1Ek7-xtw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1f81e855-acfd-c6ba-65cb-47246d0a3178@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 15:26:29 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAceSaPjjoEum_=OH1FaMvzUp1=C5e+-Xozd+uy1Ek7-xtw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6gip/wpzn0rX3TIwaP_WAEUUqg5WSPCQ>
Subject: Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk
X-BeenThere: 6gip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IP Issues in 6th Generation Mobile Network System \(6gip\)" <6gip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6gip>, <mailto:6gip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6gip/>
List-Post: <mailto:6gip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6gip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6gip>, <mailto:6gip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2020 13:26:35 -0000
I looked at its ToC briefly. It does list many of the use-cases we discussed, but not the vehicular networks use-cases Italked about, like the remote operation of autonomous shuttles. I wonder wether that URL is reachable if my client was IPv6-only? In return, here is the copy-paste of the table of contents of that paper, for your convenience: > 1 Megatrends toward 6G 9 > Connected Machines – Machine as a Main User 9 > AI – New Tool for Wireless Communications 11 > Openness of Mobile Communications 11 > Social Goals and Mobile Communications 12 > 2 6G Services 13 > Truly Immersive XR 13 > High-Fidelity Mobile Hologram 14 > Digital Replica 15 > 3 Requirements 17 > Performance Requirements 18 > Architectural Requirements 19 > Trustworthiness Requirements 20 > 4 Candidate Technologies 22 > Terahertz Technologies 22 > Novel Antenna Technologies 24 > Evolution of Duplex Technology 27 > Evolution of Network Topology 28 > Spectrum Sharing 30 > Comprehensive AI 32 > Split Computing 33 > High-Precision Network 35 > 5 6G Timeline 37 > 6 Concluding Remarks 38 Alex Le 31/07/2020 à 18:05, Behcet Sarikaya a écrit : > Thanks Alex. > > I suggest people to read Samsung 6G White Paper > https://cdn.codeground.org/nsr/downloads/researchareas/6G%20Vision.pdf > > it has all these requirements and scenarios. > > Take a look! > > Behcet > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 7:12 AM Alexandre Petrescu > <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Le 28/07/2020 à 19:20, Behcet Sarikaya a écrit : > > Hi all, > > > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 8:46 AM Behcet Sarikaya > > <sarikaya2012@gmail.com <mailto:sarikaya2012@gmail.com> > <mailto:sarikaya2012@gmail.com <mailto:sarikaya2012@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > Here are Dirk's notes from our side meeting: > > > > Minutes of side meeting 6Gip during IETF#108 online – July 27, 2020 > > 16h UTC About 20 people had dialed in. After some technical issues > > (not with Meetecho but Webex) Behcet went over the slides posted on > > the ML. Alex asked in the chat for clarification what Mandate (in > > Mandate-Driven Architecture) does mean. Behcet replied that ”mandate” > > is seen as collection of network services required from underlying > > network(s) to comply with dynamic end-to-end QoS needs from specific > > applications (in the WP) Lars complained in the chat: so if the > > proponents of this effort are planning on asking people to make time > > on their schedules for another side meeting at some time in the > > future, *please* have some actual content planned for presentation > > and discussion. Behcet agreed: OK Lars Colins key feedback was that > > IRTF does not work on overarching architecture but particular > > subtopics and problem statements – AI is already worked on in NMRG > > and computing in COIN and a contribution/collaboration there > > regarding 6G should be investigated. Alex tried to answer on what 6G > > is – perhaps (at least) true IPv6 but much more: futuristic use > > cases and scenarios, eventually what will be mandatory use cases? > > Lars said that it was not clear before the meeting what we were > > asking for. Alex mentioned that successful RGs have started low – but > > Lars emphasized that they dealt with a well scoped problem. Colin > > said that development from 5G to 6G is no concrete focus, not worked > > on by existing RGs. Behcet argued that network management is also no > > real focus. Dirk tried to explain how MDA could serve here. Marco > > asked which term could be moving towards a solution. It should be > > worked on gaps between SBA++ and current enhanced SBA (Rel. 16/17). > > Behcet mentioned future use cases and Alex clarified that hologram > > use case mentioned in WP requires much bandwidth. > > > > > > > > Alex had mentioned a few requirements/ use cases like self driving > > cars which is not captured in the minutes. > > > > Alex can you please remind them? > > When people talk about which applications are really in a need of a new > network access like 5G, several answers are given, but typically the > self-driving cars come always in the list. > > Recently, the talk of use-cases of 5G seems to be more and more focused > on this 5G for self-driving cars much more than 5G for anything else. > Yet they do ignore significant doubts. > > Some sub-use cases under the generic umbrella of the topic of > self-driving cars are: > > - tele-operation: the ability of a human operator situated in a remote > control center to take control and guide a self-driving car, by using a > very reliable (ultra) 5G link. This has itself several sub-sub-cases > like: assisting the manoeuvres of cars, bringing a car from parking to > user, parking a car, moving the car away from an arriving emergency > convoy, stop the movement of a car-gone-crazy, and more. > > - 5G-V2X: the applications designed currently for other link medias like > 802.11-OCB at 5.9GHZ (DSRC,ITS-G5) are here performed on a 5G link media > instead. One sub-sub-case is, for example, advertising the presence of > a car by broadcasting a 'CAM' message (Cooperative Awareness Message). > > - others, like low-latency communication between self-driving cars and > traffic light controller units, via a Control Center; this is to display > the color of the traffic lights on the car's dashboard even when the > car's video camera does not see (fog, etc.) > > For each of these 5G sub-usecases for self driving cars there are also > serious doubts, that I could mention separately. > > Looking onward to 6G, one should wonder why these use-cases for 5G and > self-driving cars do not materialize on a wide scale. Answering that > question might give a hint to what 6G needs to be. > > Alex > > > > > Behcet > > > > Lars: use case done meant problem statement (?) and reminds that > > IntServ had not been successful and it would be good to understand > > whether to re-invent old issues. Toerless thiks that similar > > technology could at other times be successful. L2 TSN (IEEE) using > > detnet concept (used in limited campus scenarios) could be a good > > exercise ? use cases and business models are the difficult parts (for > > all new technologies/approaches) Colin asked how to fit to new > > proposals and Behcet answered to use this opportunity to discuss > > more. Hannu emphasized that 6G would be a new generation compared to > > 5G – THz technology as good example. We should look at use cases 5G > > is not able to do – very tricky thing! Alex mentioned a typical use > > case which is not deployed in 5G: V2X (neither network-based nor > > direct communication) - more 5G use cases (other than eMBB) may not > > be deployed in 5G but only with 6G (as with other specifications in > > 3GPP never deployed). > > > > Hannu expects that in 6G the same services may be deployed, but in a > > simpler manner. Dirk agreed – also more sustainable methods could > > help deployment. FMC is another example already standardized for 3G > > but coming actually with 5G now. Alex asked whether people active in > > 3GPP could confirm that 6G has already been discussed before? Tim > > said that 3GP does not yt speak of 6G specifically but NGMN (Next > > Generation Mobile Networks association) has started to talk on this > > (WP#2). The chairs thanked all participants for joining and > > contributing to good discussion to be continued on the list and on > > future side meetings. > > > > > > -- > 6gip mailing list > 6gip@ietf.org <mailto:6gip@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6gip >
- [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk Behcet Sarikaya
- [6gip] Samsung 6G white paper sothy shan
- Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [6gip] Minutes taken by Dirk Alexandre Petrescu