[ipwave] IPv6-per-channel prohibition

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Mon, 29 May 2017 16:01 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.petrescu@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 3CEF2129AD0 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2017 09:01:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.667
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.667 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 Oe1jQgo7N1yQ for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 29 May 2017 09:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F26F6126CD6 for <its@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 09:01:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id v4TG1Odq043297 for <its@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:01:24 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 6EFA5205791 for <its@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:01:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C6F2205661 for <its@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:01:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [132.166.84.45] ([132.166.84.45]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.4) with ESMTP id v4TG1MX3015654 for <its@ietf.org>; Mon, 29 May 2017 18:01:23 +0200
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
To: "its@ietf.org" <its@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <176ca438-2b76-3be0-c61b-23eb13066c2b@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 19:01:22 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/UWXgYNzWeXnTu2OB_FxgHPjRXRk>
Subject: [ipwave] IPv6-per-channel prohibition
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: Mon, 29 May 2017 16:01:27 -0000

Hi,

During the last IPWAVE meeting at IETF Chicago we discussed about this 
IPv6-per-channel prohibition paragraph.

This new paragraph below reflects that discussion, and is part of -03.

I must say I do not agree with this text, but this seems to be what the 
room said (minutes, emails and video of the session).

The reason I disagree with it is that in France the national regulator 
does not prohibit IPv6 on any channel.  It is ETSI ITS who prohibits it. 
  ETSI ITS is a supra-national body (European organisation).

But I put this text below in -03, according to our meeting.

Alex

>    o  Prohibition of IPv6 on some channels relevant for IEEE 802.11-OCB,
>       as opposed to IPv6 not being prohibited on any channel on which
>       802.11a/b/g/n runs:
>
>       *  Some channels are reserved for safety communications; the IPv6
>          packets should not be sent on these channels.
>
>       *  At the time of writing, the prohibition is explicit at higher
>          layer protocols providing services to the application; these
>          higher layer protocols are specified in IEEE 1609 documents.
>
>       *  National or regional specifications and regulations specify the
>          use of different channels; these regulations must be followed.