Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey?
Rex Buddenberg <buddenbergr@gmail.com> Wed, 21 June 2017 04:18 UTC
Return-Path: <buddenbergr@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: its@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C7E8126D05 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 pxRJU_Nyd6sh for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x233.google.com (mail-pg0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::233]) (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 49D33126DCA for <its@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x233.google.com with SMTP id f185so71979200pgc.0 for <its@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:18:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AO0vXOyYtu4uYRC8NumtEk3hey2h1odk73+/4Ly7qMI=; b=BDKgK8yRPadn6NsrRcNK10SoM7A++Mdm0Ba+FiJ8EHkKJMpDp0/EMvppBMEq2hklkN Ei12y97KAoVE2ycmLWwDmKLdqipgNHjzqD/h9O5PSbZpoqVKpro5cYTMo180Qx+BNCL1 ShLml739izHBS7o84uPLzm05QXU+ovJ8jKBewYfZQmIZJDhMFfUWinMm0gCe99a2M9HQ Y3MBVWdbS5LRvr61ZLs6tgs64ngFdwO4m5oR2BmZQH00GAAZtI6NJpOJ1OjCzrlYMcUb RAuztp6JbEfUHHWhRP77V6Z6CFAF/AZcXPtBuYUp+4JAUp+Iw+RyJJUv2wgzx0pGjwQQ gfaA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AO0vXOyYtu4uYRC8NumtEk3hey2h1odk73+/4Ly7qMI=; b=Y869CqYmmNrRDmOk3AzuoSTBobGuIZsNVKZziijcUscis1gb16h2d5gidd6GhTLSN1 /FXh63yOhpLKOYxyg8U0RLIydwJC5m2z47DDTCmycVditPz8ZSzSrXeGwEkg5YCdplov qyip/9NzCeJO/5mhoXSXTZvwsqe6h83UoHmqwvaftefEyJbK/SkK9a4fVVZM7KzeO313 8uwIIYgf5ztxK/3kFuU2wKfcpFvBo8qrOoSuuLVtnDhyFZMu7mqiAjPdIPq/btFNn0o+ Supp+o9EFdZR/WukGoQRnaUk0fSgbrW6rNDg7KvLP1e2TSOUKX0iyNHqTPiPpQZA4UID 815w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOygFd17d2hjEXK3C+dn2Hg58XQSRbHws8JJ/tb15RoqXU2o8xED 0gzh9QVkfhzwQyoZ
X-Received: by 10.99.122.13 with SMTP id v13mr23264420pgc.156.1498018727825; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:18:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain (c-71-198-163-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [71.198.163.21]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c75sm36195081pga.38.2017.06.20.21.18.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:18:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1498018725.2400.166.camel@gmail.com>
From: Rex Buddenberg <buddenbergr@gmail.com>
To: "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>
Cc: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, its <its@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 21:18:45 -0700
In-Reply-To: <CAPK2DewLqSLVvOy5TFz3JaZKKJnKBCbuzm8xUh+sdWdivSm3Tg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA50A382-F591-4A33-BAF9-1903E107BE02@vigilsec.com> <1497977954.2400.149.camel@gmail.com> <CAPK2DewLqSLVvOy5TFz3JaZKKJnKBCbuzm8xUh+sdWdivSm3Tg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2 (3.18.5.2-1.fc23)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/HAZP6Ddsy-JI8kcPCIe50CJclh0>
Subject: Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey?
X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 04:18:55 -0000
Paul, Use case: --------------------------- Instrumented emergency vehicle use case Emergency vehicles include ambulances, fire engines, police cruisers, snowplows and more. The reason for isolating this use case is that this class of vehicles shares the communications requirements of all vehicles but has some more and more extreme requirements. In many cases, meeting the requirements for emergency vehicles will result in exceeding the requirements for the family sedan. Scenario. Consider an ambulance with one or more casualties inside. These patients will have vital signs monitors attached to them. The ambulance itself needs to deliver the casualties to a hospital. The ambulance, of course, must navigate in traffic – a characteristic of most scenarios but with urgency attached. - a LAN within the vehicle has the patient monitors attached to it. Additionally, the ambulance attendant would need at least one attachment in order to speak with an emergency room doctor. The requirement is to telemeter the casualties' vital signs to the hospital and over-shoulder advice from the ER doctor to the attendant. - the driver needs communications with dispatching to telemeter track data (position), receive dispatching orders, telemeter vehicle data (e.g. gas tank level). - the ambulance needs to communicate with other vehicles on the road. Collision avoidance, right-of-way warning (i.e. siren), traffic light control. While using an ambulance as example, all emergency vehicles have similar needs. Requirements distillation: Security. All data in the above illustrations must be verifiably authentic. Some data (such as the patient vital signs) requires confidentiality. In some cases (e.g. police car stakeout) low probability of detection of the radio-WAN communications is required. Availability. Most automotive applications require high availability (Ao defined as up time divided by total time), emergency services are the most demanding. Typically four 9s. This requirement cannot usually be met with a single radio-WAN; multiple WAN interfaces on the routers required, with the appropriate protocol capabilities. ------------------------------------------- Not a formally published paper, but the draft doesn't require that. On Wed, 2017-06-21 at 06:56 +0900, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong wrote: > Hi Rex, > As you mentioned, the revision of this draft will include the papers > for use cases that are based on > vehicular networking as follows: > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > Hwang T and Jeong J., "SANA: Safety-Aware Navigation > Application for pedestrian protection in vehicular networks", > In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference > on internet of vehicles (IOV), Chengdu, China, 19–21 > December 2015, pp.127–138. Switzerland: Springer > > Kim J, Jo Y and Jeong J., "Design and evaluation of a > smartphone-based alarming system for pedestrian safety > in vehicular networks", In: Proceedings of the 2nd international > conference on internet of vehicles (IOV), Chengdu, > China, 19–21 December 2015, pp.221–233. Switzerland: > Springer. > > Shen Y, Jeong J, Oh T, et al., "CASD: a framework of > context-awareness safety driving in vehicular networks", > In: Proceedings of the 30th international conference on > advanced information networking and applications > workshops—device centric cloud (DC2), Crans-Montana, > Switzerland, 23–25 March 2016, pp.252–257. > > Koukoumidis E, Peh L-S and Martonosi M. "SignalGuru: > leveraging mobile phones for collaborative traffic signal > schedule advisory", In: Proceedings of the 9th international > conference on mobile systems, applications, and services > (MobiSys), Washington, DC, 28 June–1 July 2011, > pp.127–140. New York: ACM. > > Jeong J, Jeong H, Lee E, et al., "SAINT: self-adaptive > interactive navigation tool for cloud-based vehicular traffic > optimization", IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2016; > 65(6): > 4053–4067. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > > Thanks for your comments. > > Best Regards, > Paul > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 1:59 AM, Rex Buddenberg <buddenbergr@gmail.co > m> wrote: > > Russ, et al, > > > > As a _survey_, this ID is fine. There is value in simply > > cataloging > > the somewhat scattered efforts in one place. So I'm thinking we > > should > > adopt as 'state of the art in the field'. So I guess I'm ^ vis > > adoption. > > But there are no use cases in the ID itself, only some of the > > references. Therefore the ID does not meet the charter call. ... > > at > > least not yet. > > Further, there doesn't seem to be much of a sorting model or > > taxonomy. What the ID does not cover (and was not Jeong's intent) > > is > > what is needed but not present. The use cases should lead to a > > taxonomy and eventually an architecture -- should those signposts > > be > > present? Or is this a proper subject for agenda bashing external > > to > > this draft? > > > > b > > > > > > On Tue, 2017-06-06 at 09:59 -0400, Russ Housley wrote: > > > The IPWAVE WG charter calls for the group to publish an > > Informational > > > document: > > > > > > This group will work on an informational document > > > that will explain the state of the art in the field and > > describe > > > the use cases that will use IPv6 in order to focus the work of > > > the group. > > > > > > Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular- > > networking- > > > survey > > > as the starting point for this deliverable? > > > > > > See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular > > -net > > > working-survey/ > > > > > > Russ > > > _______________________________________________ > > > its mailing list > > > its@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its > > > > _______________________________________________ > > its mailing list > > its@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its > > > > > -- > =========================== > Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D. > Assistant Professor > Department of Software > Sungkyunkwan University > Office: +82-31-299-4957 > Email: jaehoon.paul@gmail.com, pauljeong@skku.edu > Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
- [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeong-i… Russ Housley
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Nabil Benamar
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… José Santa Lozano
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Dirk.von-Hugo
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Rex Buddenberg
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Rex Buddenberg
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Chris Shen
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Tony Li
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Rex Buddenberg
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… tony.li
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Rex Buddenberg
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Russ Housley
- Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeo… Abdussalam Baryun