From nobody Tue Jun 15 12:12:54 2021
Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-announce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-announce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1C093A3A49;
 Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
 SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
 header.d=gmail.com
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 OznvSNkJ7egV; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:12:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com (mail-wr1-x42b.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42b])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D6273A3A47;
 Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:12:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id y7so19460213wrh.7;
 Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:12:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; 
 h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to
 :references; bh=zDFf+UYYX1DKmo8wD6aXm+0MwwOkYCZMxjRv9czgMhs=;
 b=exycBVBTDSejHlacAIOgCxZTx1y5ojEo3X5WVdqrsPgQvS47fnCip3hcULG6mi+lgx
 DWiFzUS7Igg32Ii2qok1bILVlwuVhtZ3chCpAQozTu/jLY1L2O0H7r8ERHO/i3tAPlWV
 il+fLSIZfaxCpoNqPJ/lHA94b8SNU5LpzUxLf3tHy8RhDfGUPk606iz80ct0WlZzMuZG
 9Y7KZW47SodRWxvi0i3qDNdASTH5xwJAGQzhmeneI+XmOgW+R01cFVtq1ZpNq2zMWCSu
 PCVUKJ4sVOU/ylBXHCtYLYmIHQI29qtVbQmqwCkaPTWJfoZFuB42ytE3/7rZmmsndr0b
 33nw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date
 :in-reply-to:cc:to:references;
 bh=zDFf+UYYX1DKmo8wD6aXm+0MwwOkYCZMxjRv9czgMhs=;
 b=lSxvtP0xDzqdn+m3xVdlXjH0xDWpoLXZ9w7bhEyzUNP0R45BpWHGV1cOXV82tuX+2A
 jeJqc2ix1+K608KTYWZDnqsLMxyi7wCIXeTlUF+hVBNV9jO632jIRIN60k1B4KrggNbS
 S1BVpB5SSRyr30/uBuMyHAbU3mTP1suukEhrFjL3kH3lP9KGcbc1eW7WILN5tKwMIe1l
 wdJcmKKeU8d1MuIX6OltlQ+bEzp9qcXE3M2ohAfbe2EuZ5QFBbYnl8gqIclO92cSiQrV
 GN8bqSNQf/HFMk84kW0gfdfC8XgYIxCFVENVsfzFaS6fhna+eljYoUi4XUZxud7AHEig
 UsqA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533+NxJoYqqCK0z7yKwjdhMOQUawvjdIgg7ApuLNI2rCNub1YjfA
 idCwIidQnY3A05V22ovpQBg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwdfgzrqUthJEqw5EK697Ztu4EakAC/ig5lbXnQk/2gCyeHMNtByGXPrdKTupOw/pp0w6t6/g==
X-Received: by 2002:adf:d1e8:: with SMTP id g8mr695768wrd.309.1623784365028;
 Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:12:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.199] (c-24-5-53-184.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.5.53.184])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
 c12sm22706017wrr.90.2021.06.15.12.12.42
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:12:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <16616F2C-5D81-4A43-8FB6-35195995CF67@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
 boundary="Apple-Mail=_B10F36E2-ED0E-409A-8573-07B78AE3F457";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.21\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-20.txt> (IPv6
 Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem Statement
 and Use Cases) to Informational RFC
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 12:12:39 -0700
In-Reply-To: <f9479d80-925d-6c07-a833-45508596a0b6@gmail.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>,
 last-call@ietf.org, 6MAN <6man@ietf.org>, its@ietf.org,
 draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking@ietf.org,
 Carlos Bernardos <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>, IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>,
 ipwave-chairs@ietf.org
To: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <162367936036.30618.11701281285252724314@ietfa.amsl.com>
 <CAMGpriUzZj63b_0HW_RamVyqCmrFsKTBK2AgTCftYEyc8iwT0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <f9479d80-925d-6c07-a833-45508596a0b6@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.21)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/-CTIeSZIw0cBInA3QK2eC_l4CLI>
X-BeenThere: ietf-announce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <ietf-announce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-announce>,
 <mailto:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-announce/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>,
 <mailto:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 19:12:53 -0000


--Apple-Mail=_B10F36E2-ED0E-409A-8573-07B78AE3F457
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

+1

I was going to write something similar to what Brian wrote.   This =
document says it is a problem statement, but then becomes a solution =
document.   Might be better to cut it down to only the problem statement =
part.

I also noted as Brian points out that the solution part appears to be =
dependent on OMNI given the =E2=80=9Cmust=E2=80=9D language, but OMNI is =
an informational reference.   This seems like a disconnect.

Bob


> On Jun 14, 2021, at 8:25 PM, Brian E Carpenter =
<brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> Thanks for the heads-up, Erik.
>=20
> This text at =
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networki=
ng-20#page-9
>=20
>>   Therefore, the existing IPv6 protocol can be
>>   augmented through the addition of an Overlay Multilink Network =
(OMNI)
>>   Interface [OMNI] and/or protocol changes in order to support both
>>   wireless single-hop/multihop V2V communications and multiple radio
>>   technologies in vehicular networks.
>=20
> is of concern regardless of the mention of OMNI. Does it mean "can be" =
or "needs to be"? This paragraph seems like a very short summary of a =
big problem area. At the end of page 13 there is some related =
discussion, which mentions RPL as part of the solution (good choice, =
IMHO) but again seems to depend on OMNI. I don't think the fix of simply =
removing references to OMNI works, because it would leave a gap. In an =
informational document, that is not a formal problem but as far as this =
draft describes architecture, I don't think that big a gap is =
reasonable. "OMNI" is mentioned more than 20 times in the document. =
There are also several references to AERO, which is strongly associated =
with OMNI.
>=20
> At this point I became confused about the purpose of the document. The =
Abstract says
>=20
>>   This document discusses the problem statement and use cases of
>>   IPv6-based vehicular networking
>=20
> In fact, most of section 4 seems to be a draft architecture of a =
solution.
>=20
>> 5.  Problem Statement
>>=20
>>   In order to specify protocols using the architecture mentioned in
>>   Section 4.1, IPv6 core protocols have to be adapted to overcome
>>   certain challenging aspects of vehicular networking.
>=20
> That's a big leap. But the rest of section 5 seems to get back to =
solution design.
>=20
> So I am left puzzled about what would happen next if this draft =
becomes an RFC. Do the authors expect 6man to work on the issues they've =
raised? I'm not sure they match 6man's limited charter ("not chartered =
to develop major changes or additions
> to the IPv6 specifications").
>=20
> Regards
>   Brian Carpenter
>=20
> On 15-Jun-21 13:07, Erik Kline wrote:
>> +6man, since there are many statements about IPv6 work in this =
document.
>>=20
>> One thing of note: in the time after this document was WGLC'd, 6man
>> held an adoption call on OMNI that did not result in adoption [OMNI].
>> There are at two places where this text appears:
>>=20
>>   "The existing IPv6 protocol must be augmented through the addition =
of
>>   an OMNI interface..."
>>=20
>> These statements should probably be revised (or removed).
>>=20
>> -Erik
>>=20
>> [OMNI] =
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/s1S49EYPThX34Gowu4ExPgFb32k/
>>=20
>> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 7:02 AM The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> =
wrote:
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> The IESG has received a request from the IP Wireless Access in =
Vehicular
>>> Environments WG (ipwave) to consider the following document: - 'IPv6 =
Wireless
>>> Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem
>>>   Statement and Use Cases'
>>>  <draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-20.txt> as Informational =
RFC
>>>=20
>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and =
solicits final
>>> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>>> last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2021-06-28. Exceptionally, =
comments may
>>> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the =
beginning
>>> of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>>=20
>>> Abstract
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>   This document discusses the problem statement and use cases of
>>>   IPv6-based vehicular networking for Intelligent Transportation
>>>   Systems (ITS).  The main scenarios of vehicular communications are
>>>   vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), and
>>>   vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications.  First, this document
>>>   explains use cases using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking.  Next, for
>>>   IPv6-based vehicular networks, it makes a gap analysis of current
>>>   IPv6 protocols (e.g., IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility =
Management,
>>>   and Security & Privacy), and then enumerates requirements for the
>>>   extensions of those IPv6 protocols for IPv6-based vehicular
>>>   networking.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> The file can be obtained via
>>> =
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking/
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>=20
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>=20
>=20
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------


--Apple-Mail=_B10F36E2-ED0E-409A-8573-07B78AE3F457
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEm0rfRsOCoyamPexGrut0EXfnu6gFAmDI+6cACgkQrut0EXfn
u6gaHwf/XWNsZbygvBV1XAEIoj1UCpoZ+iKwBwKDajhPt9F2Cp+psFwUaOjnRjMB
HmZNp3w77c3cFqVbsVkMH/EzWqT1RfqIhDLxk2FXYd3neayfovCtYJ8I21Cns8LT
XaG+yOM9qumWhNNbnsLp6m3BgDxHQyMbVCPds9EjM6F2LEOyh2v8uscspAHn21hH
4fo4Z5wUkre0R3raklhDDw0dZwGCBq/F9WsYqhSgwbHisolBKwI282k4Xm7h/FZa
OjWMuBvO7lE3YS6YxPChJawUEpbFwsbFDx6Fbi6xLVhyeTfcswTrk0KY2rDW1C3j
xPQswNolej+4g9ZuARAyZjAf4NLYkg==
=YlmZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_B10F36E2-ED0E-409A-8573-07B78AE3F457--

