Re: [ipwave] FCC Moves Plan Forward to Chop Up Vehicle Safety Airwaves

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

in addition to wondering what it means C-V2X
one might wonder whether C-V2X supports IPv6 or not?

also one might wonder whether FCC still considers IPv6 for vehicular 
communications?

and, if FCC keeps only the 5895-5905MHz channel, also called Control 
Channel, for DSRC, and on which it still would like to forbid (and other 
times to not forbid) IPv6, then one wonders whether the IPv6-over-OCB 
spec can be of any use anymore.

Alex

Le 17/12/2019 à 13:05, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
> 
> 
> Le 17/12/2019 à 12:05, Abdussalam Baryun a écrit :
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:59 PM Alexandre Petrescu 
>> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>     have people elsewhere paid money to get a license to talk in the 
>> 5.9GHz
>>     space?
>>
>> in the article is says the tax payers will be apposing because the 
>> cities already used money for the  DSRC, and it mentions that FCC plan 
>> will KILL and waste a lot of money of city investment by city covernment.
> 
> Right, I think it is the money they spent on deploying the DSRC 
> technology, not on spectrum.
> 
> That is indeed lots of money in itself.  Even in Europe there are 
> numerous deployments of RSUs permanently attached to poles along 
> highways.  All these RSUs and their spectrum were created and reserved 
> by starting from USA initiatives on DSRC.
> 
> I wonder what happens to all these investments in Europe if USA changes 
> tack with respect to 5.9GHz allocation to 802.11-OCB.
> 
> I think there are large misunderstandings in this FCC plan.
> 
> There are other ideas that were discussed privately and publicly about 
> reserving spectrum for a particular technology (spectrum should be 
> reserved for application kind, not for a particular PHY or MAC - in that 
> sense it seems strange to refuse DSRC but allocate for C-V2X), and about 
> reserving spectrum but still free of use (how can one reserve something 
> but still allow every one to do whatever they want in it).  There are 
> many contradictions.
> 
> Alex
> 
>>
>> AB
>>
>>     (not in Europe a single person paid such money)
>>
>>     Le 17/12/2019 à 11:56, Abdussalam Baryun a écrit :
>>      > Hi Alex,
>>      >
>>      > I think it is still a debate and not final decision, IMO it is not
>>      > possible change the spectrum while people are already using it
>>     and paid
>>      > money for it, therefore, it is only a future plan and may not be
>>     applied
>>      > in all locations in the US. Also I would like to know the opinion
>>     of US
>>      > participants on this issue please.
>>      >
>>      > AB
>>      >
>>      > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 11:59 AM Alexandre Petrescu
>>      > <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>>      >
>>      >
>>      >
>>      >     Le 17/12/2019 à 01:01, Russ Housley a écrit :
>>      >      >
>>      >
>>     
>> https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/fcc-moves-plan-forward-to-chop-up-vehicle-safety-airwaves/ 
>>
>>      >     [...]
>>      >      > The FCC plan would divide 75 MHz of the safety spectrum
>>     between WiFi
>>      >      > and auto safety applications. The FCC proposal allocates
>>     20 MHz for a
>>      >      > newer V2X technology, known as C-V2X, and leaves 10 MHz
>>     for either
>>      >      > C-V2X or DSRC.
>>      >
>>      >
>>      > AB> they will need to deliver the technology and implement it,
>>      >
>>      > It is indeed a plan that invites to think about the future.
>>      >
>>      > An implementation of IPv6 over OCB that uses a 20MHz channel,
>>     instead of
>>      > 10MHz, would no longer be 'illegal'.
>>      >
>>      > I would like to ask whether FCC considers this potential C-V2X 
>> 20MHz
>>      > channel to still be free of use for everyone (like the current 
>> 5.9GHz
>>      > band) or will it be licensed and paid for? (like e.g. the 2.6 GHz
>>     band
>>      > of LTE).
>>      >
>>      > AB> I think it should be like WiFi usedby all free,
>>      >
>>      > Alex
>>      >
>>      >
>>      >
>>      >  > _______________________________________________
>>      >  > its mailing list
>>      >  > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      >  > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>>      >  >
>>      >
>>      > _______________________________________________
>>      > its mailing list
>>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
>>      > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> its mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its