Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB
"Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com> Tue, 16 April 2019 03:23 UTC
Return-Path: <sgundave@cisco.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 D99E0120073; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:23:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=C6poHhIP; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=L01CBLks
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 zyeDbsNrcnTi; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1442C12004E; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:23:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=27158; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1555385004; x=1556594604; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=FubHZ0qI6Kx6g9WFo7l1lZUZiaMRkMH0jgp5WSXJm9U=; b=C6poHhIPcuEzCkRFrAupvTDABeYfHcc8s//TGna/7C78GPr/wpm+MkWq Ys2A/ZbE0JduBjhVRqhuOxofCPLCRj1RmP8qjr0YytBl5nNsnaM4RFpTG q7eujQBm7Iz0se6C5Zu//roOD1nVLmlRxn9v6pUgwebgaPSlg4c6/DPXm E=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:K5DgiRbu6GspDBeHihZASGj/LSx94ef9IxIV55w7irlHbqWk+dH4MVfC4el20gabRp3VvvRDjeee87vtX2AN+96giDgDa9QNMn1NksAKh0olCc+BB1f8KavxYDE8EM1cWXdu/mqwNg5eH8OtL1A=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AXAAAHSrVc/4YNJK1mDg0BAQEBAwEBAQcDAQEBgVEGAQEBCwGBDi8kBScDaFUgBAsoCodLA4RSikYcgjt+iDuNYYEuFIFnDgEBGAEKCoRAAoV6IzQJDgEDAQEKAQIBAm0cDIVKAQEBAwEBAT4BASkDCwEECwIBCA4DAwECASAHByEGCxQJCAIEAQ0FG4MIgR1MAw0PAQIMnQECihSCIB+CWgEBBYUIDQuCDQMGgTIBhGCGaReBQD+BEYIUSQcuPoIaRwEBgS4BDAYBAzyFQYpPgi6EZZNxLDYJAoIGjk6DSRuCCIYbg2aIaotmh3KMKQIEAgQFAg4BAQWBTzhlcXAVO4JsggoMF4EBAQcBgkKFFIUEO3IBgSiMeA4XgQsBgSABAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,355,1549929600"; d="scan'208,217";a="547854986"
Received: from alln-core-12.cisco.com ([173.36.13.134]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 16 Apr 2019 03:23:21 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-016.cisco.com (xch-rcd-016.cisco.com [173.37.102.26]) by alln-core-12.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x3G3NLx0029800 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 16 Apr 2019 03:23:21 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by XCH-RCD-016.cisco.com (173.37.102.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 22:23:21 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 22:23:20 -0500
Received: from NAM05-DM3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 22:23:20 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-cisco-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=IAYPuH0+PJjWqMgysc1N5ZyM41jzSrHJWYUOSRJGq4U=; b=L01CBLksk6kfSVgd4d4GaivJ7cOf2leeQuYiDMyLIqZH0cmK7vB+W+3dV6m0sevquwCwkHsdt7B1i5ck1hKnl4c9lxmY8K2J5NOGDGNawmI0tQhaIbgMyl9vlR532zY65tOY3ZXnRIdWTBVGPJ+6WAKu+Tc7DPa4/2frP6QI7W8=
Received: from BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.206.75) by BYAPR11MB2904.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.177.225.225) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1792.19; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 03:23:18 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::95c3:573a:8b16:fb20]) by BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::95c3:573a:8b16:fb20%4]) with mapi id 15.20.1792.018; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 03:23:18 +0000
From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" <sgundave@cisco.com>
To: Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, NABIL BENAMAR <n.benamar@est.umi.ac.ma>
CC: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "its@ietf.org" <its@ietf.org>, "int-dir@ietf.org" <int-dir@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb.all@ietf.org>, nabil benamar <benamar73@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB
Thread-Index: AQHU9AO8CZfBB7Vo2EyCGOiOH1gSXg==
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 03:23:18 +0000
Message-ID: <D8DA9632.2F2FDF%sgundave@cisco.com>
References: <155169869045.5118.3508360720339540639@ietfa.amsl.com> <a8aad636-069c-4451-dbf1-72c1db2204ef@gmail.com> <CAD8vqFfx_FVi5NobrR1p6xEKjkSNa1_ZejgrEs3JPDHJQoxD7A@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB356570FDBC5798F155DDEE25D82C0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAMugd_Xce5cWLtVB4DbR1ZEaFbdfiRpXre9oq61ukRC+n+3cZw@mail.gmail.com> <D8D5F0B7.2F2BB8%sgundave@cisco.com> <D8D5F510.2F2BC8%sgundave@cisco.com> <3e716b4b-8236-0488-309c-7cd3a54db7b5@gmail.com> <D8D7B1E7.2F2CA2%sgundave@cisco.com> <CAD8vqFfSGKhw_ou3VB98C8r1gq=4WD8+f8C5P53C46k-0V+XuA@mail.gmail.com> <66e7c810-45a5-5244-59dc-4b764b6fb346@gmail.com> <1a6599ee-88f9-42d9-a208-918ba6711612@gmail.com> <11645738-6f95-82e5-48f1-ebc3ce54423e@gmail.com> <6aaea808-6013-cd73-c894-c29fd8c98ac8@gmail.com> <72f60b2f-0a3a-8d60-f6de-09c058913c33@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <72f60b2f-0a3a-8d60-f6de-09c058913c33@earthlink.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.7.170905
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=sgundave@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [128.107.241.164]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b375f85a-d79d-4d56-6a4f-08d6c21adf09
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600140)(711020)(4605104)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:BYAPR11MB2904;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB2904:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB29042F02FA5443F75F168A53D9240@BYAPR11MB2904.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 000947967F
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(136003)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(346002)(396003)(199004)(189003)(966005)(71200400001)(5660300002)(54906003)(236005)(6512007)(54896002)(6306002)(4326008)(6116002)(53936002)(105586002)(66574012)(68736007)(6246003)(7736002)(71190400001)(106356001)(3846002)(36756003)(25786009)(66066001)(256004)(14444005)(99286004)(446003)(606006)(97736004)(14454004)(76176011)(86362001)(229853002)(81156014)(6436002)(186003)(8936002)(476003)(110136005)(58126008)(81166006)(8676002)(93886005)(2616005)(11346002)(316002)(6486002)(53546011)(486006)(6506007)(102836004)(26005)(2906002)(478600001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR11MB2904; H:BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: nLUFmBCBRJ//CTy643Dlv4l98RWXFSw53BJb8eFB/Vp0FyfDuYFkUNtQnwsaUGDDJ5IFrDPIctcEcH802ngUT+errtHA6McZdoRpe9cXxucT1sssgni9MasmJttl9uHTKcCE5WpnDz00KmjDKGkYR9zWXglN4Tv50AMBsSGum3NmU3/XDmCGSdF1mV1EYJR3M5yPSQP6EU/AP0T8J1TckZSdPPgf+m1hbfIN81MZQxtzvRSeUVBGUswyOHwkTgiSJwXckTuTO4foKryTp0uImlCO6KYYh0rwxr2st5NUcunfgVEhXF+3KrwUO19mLJ2G/MDEHidjkC41kcKS4MpsGCytAXcDcw+NqqTIEezJ8CnPUz0vxZcvK32cdVRYF4ufUJ3lB1BuNmrOUkEZwbL0e6UAeLiQyu5RBlRWjVSNLMY=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D8DA96322F2FDFsgundaveciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b375f85a-d79d-4d56-6a4f-08d6c21adf09
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 16 Apr 2019 03:23:18.4647 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB2904
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.26, xch-rcd-016.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-12.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/UMK_o0d1x95BsOvu6PCPCOAgogY>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 23:08:44 -0700
Subject: Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB
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: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 03:23:28 -0000
> RFC 8505 isn't just about low power. More to the point in this discussion, it's about reducing interference by reducing the number of multicasts needed in a multilink subnet. Please note that I am neither discouraging nor advocating the use of RFC 8505 for v6-over-OCB, but I think it would be better to avoid suggesting that it is only useful for low-power mesh. Hi Charlie – Sure, but IMO multicast is not the only issue for vehicular communications. We need a protocol that is designed for vehicular environments. We don’t really need to force-fit some protocol which did not factor a single vehicular property in its design, just because it exists. We need to figure out many more things (RSU network topology, links models, prefix hosting approaches, mobility etc) in addition to multicast problem. In that sense, I agree we should look at all IETF specs including RFC 8505 and leverage any available protocols semantics. Sri From: Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net<mailto:charles.perkins@earthlink.net>> Date: Monday, April 15, 2019 at 7:16 AM To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com<mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com<mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>>, NABIL BENAMAR <n.benamar@est.umi.ac.ma<mailto:n.benamar@est.umi.ac.ma>>, Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com<mailto:sgundave@cisco.com>> Cc: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com<mailto:pthubert@cisco.com>>, "ietf@ietf.org<mailto:ietf@ietf.org>" <ietf@ietf.org<mailto:ietf@ietf.org>>, "its@ietf.org<mailto:its@ietf.org>" <its@ietf.org<mailto:its@ietf.org>>, "int-dir@ietf.org<mailto:int-dir@ietf.org>" <int-dir@ietf.org<mailto:int-dir@ietf.org>>, "draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb.all@ietf.org>" <draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb.all@ietf.org>>, nabil benamar <benamar73@gmail.com<mailto:benamar73@gmail.com>> Subject: Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Hello Alex and all, I have a few comments, although I have only briefly scanned the OCB draft. * RFC 8505 isn't just about low power. More to the point in this discussion, it's about reducing interference by reducing the number of multicasts needed in a multilink subnet. Please note that I am neither discouraging nor advocating the use of RFC 8505 for v6-over-OCB, but I think it would be better to avoid suggesting that it is only useful for low-power mesh. * Even if you did have four cars to run experiments, the results could hardly be considered conclusive. Simulation can be very helpful in such circumstances. You know the velocities and the range of the signal. You have many many thousands of easily accessible real-world topologies, and even the interference characteristics. * I made a quick scan of the draft and found this: "All nodes in the subnet MUST be able to communicate directly using their link-local unicast addresses.". Does this mean that the solution is not applicable for topologies exhibiting the hidden terminal problem? Or, does "directly" mean something else? I think the draft could benefit from a very clear applicability statement, specifically including the projected number of vehicles in the subnet. If every vehicle on the subnet can expect deliver of multicast packets to every other vehicle on the subnet, then the problem is different than if hidden terminal effects occur or if multicast is unreliable for some other reason. Maybe for clarity it would be helpful to include a diagram of a general target network with more than three or four vehicles. You can also tell me that my opinion lacks relevance since I have not carefully read the draft. Regards, Charlie P. On 4/15/2019 4:54 AM, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: Hi Brian, Le 14/04/2019 à 22:49, Brian E Carpenter a écrit : Hi Alexandre, On 15-Apr-19 04:38, Alexandre Petrescu wrote: [...] The baseline Neighbor Discovery protocol (ND) [RFC4861] MUST be used over 802.11-OCB links. Transmitting ND packets may prove to have some performance issues. These issues may be exacerbated in OCB mode. Solutions for these problems SHOULD consider the OCB mode of operation. The best of current knowledge indicates the kinds of issues that may arise with ND in OCB mode; they are described in Appendix J. That's exactly the text that I find problematic. I can't write a new version because I lack your expert knowledge, but IMHO it should be more specific: I do have expert knowledge on ND on OCB, although only at a certain level. It works. Other people may claim ND does not work on OCB, but have they tried OCB at all? It is the people who claim ND does not work on OCB should write the new version of the 'TBD' text. It is very simple to try ND on OCB. I published a howto on the email list. A Hackathon w/o me was tried following that howto. A few other organisations that I work with tried it (w/o me). I did not received feedback from them about ND not working. What is difficult to try is to reproduce the ND-over-OCB problem imagined by Pascal. It is difficult to try because it involves 4 cars (I dont have that many). It is also difficult to try because it seems to miss the fact that OCB can do high power. Maybe that high power solves the problems that appear in ND over low power. For my part, I cant put text about ND on OCB without having an implementation of that problem. It is for that reason that I asked Pascal, or anybody else claiming ND does not work on OCB, to try it and write that text 'TBD'. Alex The baseline Neighbor Discovery protocol (ND) [RFC4861] MUST be used over 802.11-OCB links. However, as on any wireless link, transmission of multicast ND packets may fail in OCB. In particular, scenarios where TBD TBD TBD are likely to be unreliable and SHOULD NOT be deployed until an alternative standardised solution is available. The best of current knowledge indicates the kinds of issues that may arise with ND in OCB mode; they are described in Appendix J. Also I don't like this phrasing in Appendix J: Early experiences indicate that it should be possible to exchange IPv6 packets over OCB while relying on IPv6 ND alone for DAD and AR (Address Resolution). Could you rather say the opposite: Early experience indicates that it is possible to exchange IPv6 packets over OCB while relying on IPv6 ND alone for DAD and AR (Address Resolution) in good conditions. However, this does not apply if TBD TBD TBD... Regards Brian Alex Regards Brian On 14-Apr-19 13:58, NABIL BENAMAR wrote: +1 Sri On Sun, Apr 14, 2019, 00:06 Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) <sgundave@cisco.com<mailto:sgundave@cisco.com><mailto:sgundave@cisco.com><mailto:sgundave@cisco.com>> wrote: I understand your point Brian, but IMO there are enough reasons not to delay this work. There are many use-cases/applications where there is a stable topology of RSU¹s and OBU¹s. The regulations around 5.9 Ghz (DSRC) band allows the channel use for non-priority/non-traffic safety related applications. For example, a vehicle in a gas station can receive a coupon from the 802.11-OCB radio (AP/RSU) in the gas station. There, its a stable topology that classic ND is designed for. In this operating mode, its perfectly reasonable to use classic ND and it works. The authors have shown enough lab data on the same. Ideally, I agree with you that it makes lot more sense to publish both the specs at the same time. But, for what ever reasons the WG went on this path. Authors have spent incredible amount of efforts in getting the draft this far and we cannot ignore that. You can see the efforts from the version number; when did we last see a draft version -037? We also need to distill the recent ND discussions and filter out the threads that are clearly motivated to insert a ND protocol that is designed for a totally different operating environment. An argument that a protocol designed for low-power environments is the solution for vehicular environments requires some serious vetting. Looking at the characteristics, always-sleeping, occasional internet connectivity, low-power, no memory, no processing power, no mobility ..etc, meeting vehicular requirements is some thing most people in the WG do not get it. Bottom line, IMO, we should move this forward and publish the document. All we need is a simple statement in the spec which puts some scope limits, w.r.t the missing ND pieces and issues. There are other proposals in the WG that will address the gaps and bring closure to the work. Sri On 4/12/19, 1:28 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com<mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com><mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com><mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote: >On 13-Apr-19 02:59, Sri Gundavelli (sgundave) wrote: >>If you go back and check 2017 archives, I did raise many of these >>issues. But, we clearly decided to limit the scope excluding address >>configuration, DAD, ND aspect, link models. When there is such a scope >>statement, it should clearly move these comments to the draft that >>defines how ND works for 802.11-OCB links. > >This is of course possible. In general the IETF hasn't done that, but has >followed the lead set by RFC 2464 with the complete specification of >IPv6-over-foo in one document. > >However, I don't believe that publishing an RFC about the frame format >without *simultaneously* publishing an RFC about ND etc would be a good >idea. That would leave developers absolutely unable to write useful >code, and might easily lead to incompatible implementations. Since >we'd presumably like Fords to be able to communicate with Peugeots, >that seems like a bad idea. > >Regards > Brian . _______________________________________________ its mailing list its@ietf.org<mailto:its@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Nabil Benamar
- [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ipwave… Pascal Thubert
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre PETRESCU
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review ofdraft-ietf-ipw… fygsimon
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… NABIL BENAMAR
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Russ Housley
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Ole Troan
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Ole Troan
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Ole Troan
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Ole Troan
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… NABIL BENAMAR
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Ole Troan
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre PETRESCU
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Ole Troan
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- [ipwave] IPv6-over-foo and Addressing Architectur… Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [ipwave] IPv6-over-foo and Addressing Archite… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… William Whyte
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] about V2I to traffic lights controll… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… NABIL BENAMAR
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Russ Housley
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Nabil Benamar
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… NABIL BENAMAR
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdir ea… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Intdir early review of dra… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… NABIL BENAMAR
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Nabil Benamar
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] side note RFC 4291 2nd par sec. 2.1 … Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Intdir early review of draft-ietf-ip… Jong-Hyouk Lee
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] pencil and paper vs cars Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Charlie Perkins
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] link-local text (Re: Intdi… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Brian E Carpenter
- [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb and… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [ipwave] which BSM? Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] link-local text (Re: [Int-dir] Intdi… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] which BSM? William Whyte
- Re: [ipwave] which BSM? Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] which BSM? William Whyte
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] which BSM? Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] which BSM? William Whyte
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] link-local text (Re: Intdi… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] ND-over-OCB hidden terminals: truck … Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- [ipwave] Hidden terminal problem Charlie Perkins
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Hidden terminal problem Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] link-local text (Re: Intdi… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] 118 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] use-cases in Problem Statement Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] use-cases in Problem Statement NABIL BENAMAR
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [ipwave] use-cases in Problem Statement Jérôme Härri
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Eric Gray
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Stephen Farrell
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] Hidden terminal problem Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] use-cases in Problem Statement Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Hidden terminal problem Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] side note RFC 4291 2nd par… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] 118 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Suresh Krishnan
- Re: [ipwave] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Hidden terminal problem Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [ipwave] Hidden terminal problem Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 神明達哉
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Russ Housley
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Russ Housley
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] 118 Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Carsten Bormann
- Re: [ipwave] [Int-dir] Expertise on ND problems o… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Charlie Perkins
- Re: [ipwave] Expertise on ND problems on OCB Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [ipwave] AH with NIST quantum resistant new a… Alexandre Petrescu