Re: [DMM] Call for adoption: draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids-01

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Alexandru Petrescu
<alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 22/04/2015 18:06, Behcet Sarikaya a écrit :
>>
>>   Hi Alex,
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Alexandru Petrescu
>> <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 16/04/2015 06:58, Jouni Korhonen a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> The adoption call for this I-D has ended. There is a clear concensus to
>>>> adopt the I-D as a working group item.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I support its adoption.
>>>
>>> We have been working with an identifier specific to automobiles to use to
>>> realize access control.  Identifying an entire set of IP nodes deployed
>>> in a
>>> vehicle is different than identifying an end-user like address@realm.
>>>
>>> We looked for such an identifier and believe the VIN (Vehicle
>>> Identification
>>> Number) be a good candidate.
>>>
>>> One would consider using one type, like type 40, to encode the VIN or
>>> parts
>>> of it, into an MN-ID.
>>>
>>> The questions to the group are the following:
>>> - is VIN considered private information? (in deployments it is private
>>>    to a certain extent, but publicly avaliable to cameras or in public
>>>    databases to another extent).
>>> - is the MN-ID type 40 ok for it.
>>> - is one type sufficient or should there be subtypes.
>>
>>
>> What is your model here in providing Internet access to the car?
>> As you may know, operators in US are deploying systems that connect
>> the car to their LTE network upstream and downstream is the passengers
>> in the car that access over Wi-Fi.
>> With LTE, you get mobility support which is based on fixed anchoring.
>> I cc'ed to Raj who works on these types of technologies.
>> The ID there is the IMSI. I don't think vin is used.
>
>
> The model of Internet access to the cars for cars currently on market in
> Europe is the same - the LTE technology is used, using the IMSI as an
> identifier.  However, that does not use MN-ID, is only IPv4, is not WiFi and
> does not resist to cellular generation upgrades to 5G and beyond.

I don't understand the handover scenario. I think you are mixing the
car and the passengers in the car.
LTE is available on a large geography, why should you handover the
upstream traffic to Wi-Fi?

Behcet
>
> Newer models will feature IPv6 in addition to IPv4, WiFi handover from LTE
> to house's hotspot, continuous sessions, and over-the-air software update
> for cheap upgradeability to future generation 5G and beyond.
>
> In this context it is hard to imagine IMSI will be there for a long time in
> a given car, and a more permanent identifier is needed.
>
> To Raj - is LTE considering other kinds of identifiers for access control
> (other than IMSI) for vehicular environments, like V2X?
>
> Alex
>
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Behcet
>>>
>>>
>>> Yours,
>>>
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Jouni & Dapeng
>>>>
>>>> 4/1/2015, 8:02 AM, Jouni Korhonen kirjoitti:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> This emails starts a two week call for the I-D
>>>>>     draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids-01
>>>>> to confirm the aadoption s a DMM WG document. The call ends April 15th
>>>>> EOB PST.
>>>>>
>>>>> Express your support or opposition to the mailing list. During the
>>>>> IETF92 meeting we got 7 voices for the adoption so at least the same
>>>>> amount supporting emails should be expected.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Jouni & Dapeng
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dmm mailing list
>>>> dmm@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dmm mailing list
>>> dmm@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
>>
>>
>>
>
>