Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 figure comparing .11 to .11-OCB

Hi Alex, Jerome, All

I agree with Jerome to illustrate the SLAAC in the process of IPv6 configuration. 
It will show that there is no difference with other networks in the IP layer.

Best Regards,
Nabil 

> On Feb 1, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Jérôme Härri <jerome.haerri@eurecom.fr> wrote:
> 
> Hello Alex, All
>  
> I agree with Hans-Joachim, no beacon in OCB mode..and in general, we do not need to show ‘beacons’ in the chart, as even the association process does not ‘need’ a beacon…it just depends on if you do ‘active’ or ‘passive’ scanning. 
>  
> So, if you want to avoid any misunderstanding, you can also simply remove beacons from the drawing and mention ‘active scanning’…if you want to keep it, then if you use a beacon, then you do not need the probes (and mention ‘passive’ scanning)..directly association (to the best of my knowledge..)
>  
> As for the data chart, it is also unclear..I would also tend to say that it could be easier to have bi-directional arrows for ‘data’ in both cases.
>  
> Another point: this document is about IPv6..I would therefore suggest maybe to add the IPv6 processes (so that we have IPv6 data). So, you could add the SLAAC charts and maybe even Router Solicitation/advertisement charts. What do you think? These would be common between WLAN and OCB…we could then just visually show that we bypass some ‘lower layer’ phases, but IP remains similar. This could also help us with the statement that IPv6 needs to guarantee the security process that OCB is not doing…with such chart, that could help.
>  
> Best Regards,
>  
> Jérôme
>  
> From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Hans-Joachim Fischer
> Sent: Wednesday 01 February 2017 11:58
> To: its@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 figure comparing .11 to .11-OCB
>  
>  
> 
> Beacons are not known in OCB mode
> Data goes bi-directional
> Hans-Joachim Fischer
> 
>  
> Am 01.02.2017 um 11:44 schrieb Alexandre Petrescu:
>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00  figure comparing .11 to .11-OCB 
>> 
>> Hello IPWAVErs, 
>> 
>> I suggested to illustrate the differences between .11 and .11-OCB by means of a figure, and a co-author produced it.  Unless there is opposition I will include it in the draft. 
>> 
>>    STA                    AP                 STA                    AP 
>>      |                      |                  |                      | 
>>      |<------ Beacon -------|                  |<------ Beacon -------| 
>>      |                      |                  |                      | 
>>      |---- Probe Req. ----->|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |<--- Probe Res. ------|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |                      |                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |---- Auth Req. ------>|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |<--- Auth Res. -------|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |                      |                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |---- Asso Req. ------>|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |<--- Asso Res. -------|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |                      |                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |------- Data -------->|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>>      |------- Data -------->|                  |------- Data -------->| 
>> 
>>      (a) Traditional IEEE 802.11               (b) IEEE 802.11 OCB mode 
>> 
>> 
>> Yours, 
>> 
>> Alex 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ 
>> its mailing list 
>> its@ietf.org <mailto:its@ietf.org> 
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its>
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Hans-Joachim Fischer
> Managing Director
>  
>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>  
>          Seminars on Cooperative Intelligent Transport Systems
>              http://fischer-tech.eu/Feeds/CITSseminars.html <http://fischer-tech.eu/Feeds/CITSseminars.html>
>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> + + + Instaurare omnia in Christo + + +
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> The information contained in this message is confidential and may be legally 
> privileged. This email is intended for the addressee(s). Addressees may be 
> individual persons or members of mailing list. 
> If you are not an addressee, you are hereby notified that any use, 
> dissemination, or reproduction of this email and its optional attachements is 
> strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please 
> contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original 
> message. 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ESF GmbH
> Fichtenweg 9
> 89143 Blaubeuren
> +49 (7344) 175340 (Direct line)
> +49 (7344) 919188 (Central office)
> +49 (7344) 919123 (Fax)
> http://fischer-tech.eu <http://fischer-tech.eu/> : Main web of ESF GmbH
> http://its-standards.eu <http://its-standards.eu/> : News on cooperative ITS standardization
> http://its-testing.org <http://its-testing.org/> : International consultancy for cooperative ITS
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ESF online-news:    http://fischer-tech.eu/Feeds/esf.rss <http://fischer-tech.eu/Feeds/esf.rss>
> C-ITS online news:  http://its-standards.info/Feeds/cits.rss <http://its-standards.info/Feeds/cits.rss>
> ESF Online Nachrichten: http://fischer-tech.de/Feeds/esfD.rss <http://fischer-tech.de/Feeds/esfD.rss>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> its mailing list
> its@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its