Re: [its] GeoNet/ITS Charter proposal 00 - please comment

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi Will, Hi Guangqing,

ICN can be considered as a possible option, but I agree with Guangqing that it cannot solve all the mentioned challenges.

Regarding the definition of Internet-wide Geo-networking, problem statement, use cases, requirements, challenges to be solved by IETF and possible solutions please look at:

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-karagiannis-problem-statement-geonetworking-00.txt

Best regards,
Georgios


From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0)
Sent: donderdag 31 oktober 2013 4:45
To: Guangqing Deng
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [its] GeoNet/ITS Charter proposal 00 - please comment


Can I consider that there may be more than one way to realize the so-called Internet-wide Geo-Networking and
ICN is one possible approach? Or there are multiple kinds of Geo-Networking and ICN just realize one kind?
Anyway, ICN must also face the challenges listed by Georgios before, such as Geo-addressing, Geo-routing and
updating the location database et al. Are there any mechanisms available within ICN to handle the issues
caused by those challenges?

I haven't followed ICN closely enough yet to answer.  I don't think the have the mechanisms in place, but I think they know they have to be there and may be working some of those solutions.  I think some of the items ICN is working is very synergistic to ITS.  Event Advertising, weather, and road/traffic conditions seam very ICN related to me.  Whereas medical Information between ambulance and  hospital may be direct IP and forward vehicle collision warning using manet.

Will

________________________________
Guangqing Deng
CNNIC

From: Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0)<mailto:[e-mail]>
Date: 2013-10-31 07:44
To: Guangqing Deng<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [its] GeoNet/ITS Charter proposal 00 - please comment
Depending on what aspects of communication and information transfer a vehicle is engaged in, one may find Information-Centric Networking will solve a lot of problems.  ICN also has  address binding requirement similar to geo-networking.   Those attending IETF next week, may want to peek into the ICNRG activities.

Will


From: Guangqing Deng <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 5:42 PM
To: "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: Re: [its] GeoNet/ITS Charter proposal 00 - please comment

Hi, Georgios and all, the description and challenge listed below are very helpful for me (as well as others, I think) to understand the so-called Internet-wide Geo-Networking.
I am new to ITS WG and think that a clear definition of Internet-wide Geo-Networking helps a lot. And in my opinion, ITS WG maybe needs to give a definition for Internet-wide
Geo-Networking, if such definition is not available yet.

________________________________
Guangqing Deng
CNNIC

 From: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
 Date: 2013-10-31 00:29
 To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
 Subject: Re: [its] GeoNet/ITS Charter proposal 00 - please comment

Hi Alex,



 What I miss form this charter description are: (1) the Internet-wide Geonetworking description and (2) the challenges associated internet-wide geonetworking that can be addressed by IETF.



Description:

Internet-wide Geo-Networking is a location-aware forwarding protocol that provides packet routing using geographical positions for packet transport over the Internet. Vehicular networking can be considered as one of the most important enabling technologies required to implement a myriad of applications related to vehicles, vehicle traffic, drivers, passengers and pedestrians.”

The challenges associated with Internet-wide Geonetworking that can be addressed by IETF are:

=> Geo-addressing in the wired Internet: standard Internet routers are not aware of geo-networking functionality:
used addresses must be regular addresses that route to / via the first geo-aware access router, e.g., RSU

=> Geo-routing
forwarding from source node to the right first geo-aware access router, e.g., RSU, (over the standard Internet)

=> Exchanging destination area information:
destination area specification needs to be exchanged at this first geo-aware access router

=> Lookup and translation of destination (geographical) area to IP address

=> Updating the location database



Best regards,

Georgios





________________________________
Van:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> [[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>] namens Alexandru Petrescu [[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>]
Verzonden: woensdag 30 oktober 2013 16:51
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Onderwerp: [its] GeoNet/ITS Charter proposal 00 - please comment
Hello ITSers,

Please see below the Charter proposal for GeoNet/ITS.

Please comment.

Alex


                        GeoNet/ITS BoF at IETF
                           Charter Proposal
                          October 30th, 2013
                 http://ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its



Internet-Wide GeoNetworking for Vehicular Communications (GeoNet/ITS)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Status: BoF

Chairs:
   Margaret Wasserman
   Alexandru Petrescu

Assigned Area Director:
   Ted Lemon

Mailing list
   Address: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
   To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
   Archive:
   http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/its/current/maillist.html

Additional web page, old
   http://www.lara.prd.fr/ietf-its

Draft Charter Proposal:

Context
-------
The group is concerned with Internet-wide geonetworking for vehicular
communications.  Achieving full penetration of Internet to mobile
vehicular platforms can only be realized in a geographical-aware
manner.

The vehicular platforms include: IP devices embedded in vehicles, such
as ruggedized units, IP-CAN gateways, sensors; mobile devices carried
by passengers; and fixed infrastructure units such as Internet-enabled
or non-Internet road-side units, electrical charging stations,
geo-broadcasting units.

The IP devices within a vehicle form an on-board IP network - likely
Ethernet - exhibiting a relatively stable structure.  On another hand,
the mobile vehicles and the fixed units may be stringed together and
further connected to the Internet by means of generic radio-WANs such
as cellular 4G, and of dedicated radio-LANs specific to vehicular
communications such as IEEE 802.11p.  Contrary to the stability of
individual on-board networks, the cellular and 802.11p links form more
volatile IP topologies as the vehicles move, and they have lower
capacity and higher noise than customary Ethernet and similar wired
links.

The use-cases are numerous.  They relate to vehicular traffic
efficiency, traffic safety and to a lesser extent to on-board
infotainment and diagnostic-over-IP (DoIP).  An ability is needed to
disseminate IP packets to areas delimited by precise geographic
coordinates.  For example, a forward collision warning should be sent
to all vehicles on incoming lanes of same direction, but it is
worthless for the outgoing or on the reverse direction.  Another
example is an instrumented ambulance connected to the Internet; it
moves through a traffic jam and may signal its heading by multicasting
IP packets over IEEE 802.11p direct links within a range of a limited
radius; it also sends data about patient condition to the
hospital-based crew to ready the appropriate care units.  Event
advertising to vehicles passing near a museum, and remote diagnostic
of a localized damaged vehicle are other related use-cases.

Security aspects will be considered: influence of the absence of
link-layer security in the operation outside the context of a BSS
(IEEE 802.11p), security of multicast distribution, authenticity of
routing message exchanges, and more.

The WG will consider and, if necessary - profile, existing IPv6
network protocols: MANET protocols, ICMPv6, MLDv2, DNS.

Several Standards Development Organizations external to IETF work
towards developing protocols for vehicular communications.  In some
cases IP protocols are used for transport, in other cases IP protocols
are modified for purposes particular to vehicular communications.  The
WG will survey the following extra-IETF groups: IEEE 802.11 TGp, IEEE
P1609, ETSI TC ITS Networking Group, ISO TC204 WG16, GENIVI Network
Experts Group, AUTOSAR Work Package A2, IPSO.  When possible, liaisons
will be established with these organizations.

Work Items
----------
Problem statement, use cases, scenarios and requirements of using
geonetworking for vehicular communications, as well as Internet-wide
geonetworking.

Practices and gap analysis for geonetworking for IP vehicular
communications: document practices for the deployment of existing IP
protocols and identify any limitation of the existing IP protocols to
fulfill the scenarios and requirements for geonetworking in IP
vehicular communications.

The use of IPv6 over 802.11p involving a minimum number of intermediary
layers.

Milestones:
   Sep 2013 - Submit individual draft on Internet-wide geonetworking
              problem statement. (done)
   Oct 2014 - Submit individual draft on the use of
              IPv6-over-802.11p link layer.
   Feb 2014 - Submit individual drafts on Problem Statement, use cases,
              scenarios and requirements for geonetworking.
   Jun 2014 - Submit individual drafts on practices and gap analysis.

_______________________________________________
its mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its