[ipwave] Risks for the future of OCB mode at 5.9GHz

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Fri, 12 February 2021 10:51 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CD8E3A155B for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 02:51:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.648
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XxnIt_poTdau for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 02:51:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr []) (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 371E93A155A for <its@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 02:51:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr []) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 11CApTUk042720 for <its@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:51:29 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost []) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 3C7A1208CEE for <its@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:51:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet2-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr []) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8FB208CF0 for <its@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:51:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [] ([]) by muguet2-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 11CApSeU032252 for <its@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:51:29 +0100
To: IPWAVE WG <its@ietf.org>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e1d2a31f-5587-cf05-da86-e38fc47adab5@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:51:28 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/8hgQif1KeyROv2iVGSAD69r0wyI>
Subject: [ipwave] Risks for the future of OCB mode at 5.9GHz
X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPWAVE - IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments WG at IETF <its.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/its>, <mailto:its-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/its/>
List-Post: <mailto:its@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:its-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its>, <mailto:its-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 10:51:34 -0000

I take advantage of a private message I received, in order to explain
this in English, and to the public email list.

I have some doubts about the future of OCB mode of WiFi.

The recent re-allocation of spectrum by FCC in USA divides the space
typically used for OCB mode of 802.11 into a space for C-V2X (a
different mode than 802.11) and a space for WiFi.

The C-V2X already ate the OCB mode at cca 5.8-5.9GHz, by allocation.
The WiFi is highly likely to eat the OCB mode at cca 5.4-5.8GHz.  The
reason of this is that WiFi is always and will always be looking at
increasing the bandwidth; that increase can be achieved by widening the
bands.  This is what WiFi 6E does when claiming to offer 4Gbit/s at 6GHz
('6' is a coincidence).

In the past, what FCC did in USA at 5.9GHz was simply replicated in
Europe and other parts of the world.  Even if today much RSU deployment
exists in Europe (refs available) that runs OCB at 5.9GHz, and VW Golf
8s send CAMs to each other, many indicators point that it might be that
these will disappear.  Such indicators are, for example, lack of OCB
mode in smartphones, pushes from industry alliance 5GAA towards 5G-V2X,
lack of FCC reply to IPv6-over-OCB comment, and other declarations.

It is for these reasons that I tend to think the future of OCB mode of
802.11 at around 5.9GHz is probably at risk.