IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey?

<Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de> Tue, 20 June 2017 16:49 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=337d6408c=Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de>
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 08296131BB5 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 09:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.321
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.321 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=telekom.de
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 sty3xGJzHhS6 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 09:49:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MAILOUT21.telekom.de (MAILOUT21.telekom.de [80.149.113.251]) (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 8D7FD131B84 for <its@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 09:49:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telekom.de; i=@telekom.de; q=dns/txt; s=dtag1; t=1497977354; x=1529513354; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=6UQpKE1BPLY46BIE0vEmW1yoRdEWITso9X1DhfZLTz8=; b=Q2vVivMW5RXhgaR6hwORIsEgHoLiATX+vj8M69yDmPheWDnkKZ44wcY5 ex9SY1GDrIhyZjVKUyHIdB6Y9LuK8u3gqNiS5QIt5PMMT2CiX+Rp5F+T0 GWR7aY7vMtxq/3PnpZUa7K7McsF+QywFgGLJwisg/u5bcHnn31P7txJNR EFmn4HDapZKEc8zh2+RAun+/tm8GgYArZ3Oiynx4v+w9XtaJvbedw6KYu fJfkmMoDrXnfOCGjp2yPTQUPDtk6PUSKlC979jWplvmWoPaNMihW6cVBa 0YY6xTKEn6jnQqKJ0R1ot/u3u/vBCzUsbLUaI1nK9AUjdwdlOxLgCqctZ g==;
Received: from q4de8psa04t.blf.telekom.de ([10.151.13.130]) by MAILOUT21.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jun 2017 18:49:11 +0200
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,364,1493676000"; d="scan'208";a="686472998"
Received: from he105829.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.169.119.32]) by Q4DE8PSA04V.blf.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 20 Jun 2017 18:49:11 +0200
Received: from HE105831.EMEA1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.119.34) by HE105829.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.169.119.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1263.5; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 18:49:10 +0200
Received: from HE105831.EMEA1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::68a7:ffa4:81be:3178]) by HE105831.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([fe80::68a7:ffa4:81be:3178%26]) with mapi id 15.00.1263.000; Tue, 20 Jun 2017 18:49:10 +0200
From: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de
To: cjbc@it.uc3m.es, housley@vigilsec.com, its@ietf.org
Thread-Topic: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey?
Thread-Index: AQHS3s02PTnVrUYwpEmvnXjzJnYVqKIt1aCAgAA1QoA=
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:49:10 +0000
Message-ID: <981cca634f7d4dbf8675ae564aa73b94@HE105831.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
References: <CA50A382-F591-4A33-BAF9-1903E107BE02@vigilsec.com> <1497972729.3352.65.camel@it.uc3m.es>
In-Reply-To: <1497972729.3352.65.camel@it.uc3m.es>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.117.17.25]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/XdT0f0nzq206OkBrmphET51gChs>
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: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:49:18 -0000

Dear chairs,
I am in favor of adopting the draft as starting point for the WG chartered informational RFC since it has much on state of the art in the field of vehicular communication - although IMO it could/should be further extended (to include e.g. 3GPPs LTE-V) and describe typical use cases in more detail (platooning is just mentioned once) ...

Best Regards
Dirk 

-----Original Message-----
From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano
Sent: Dienstag, 20. Juni 2017 17:32
To: Russ Housley; its
Subject: Re: [ipwave] Should the IPWAVE WG adopt draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey?

Hi,

So far we have only received 3 opinions on this adoption. Please, express your opinion (in favor or against adoption, preferably with some comments in both cases).

Thanks!

Carlos & Russ

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email