Re: [ipwave] RSU minor textual issue

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Tue, 30 May 2017 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.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 95FD81294E7 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 May 2017 07:29:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 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_LOW=-0.7, 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 IxRbk-OSpDXt for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 May 2017 07:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x241.google.com (mail-wm0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::241]) (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 EF972126579 for <its@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 May 2017 07:29:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x241.google.com with SMTP id g15so25645508wmc.2 for <its@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 May 2017 07:29:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:subject:to:references:cc:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=h1v+k+m1uWQopKSvjK4+gK+uGP4C6ykIgn3HuvMPfjI=; b=NguioaBs4tQVOHBSKTlzryMcGX9d3ttjbGufXYPCHMZwCn7TchjECaSvcSW6WkHgJ7 LpOzeFJEMJIxYvp+VvhA31cVm0jPJeTRzeZ2POJ0lAmvCE7YKHvZasHAJB1/9/x/+IHz Yjrcw7cbHsTRm/InXM50ASx980zdSs2kUZHFYl4BAgZd60qobGel7BuwSXrVpQqk/LPF 8mXR1V1tbkbx755TqoHerv6/P8XIvjdOPWEdQ5FgpoZ86c3DCL6L6o1e2iFiu0HvpfUx JUwF3/WDgymTC1ExzosTuTyD+zIfsB1B7vuaZHPS/CCx/m/eZjYeuHUmr2VJSrw2D8uo f1Ew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:to:references:cc:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=h1v+k+m1uWQopKSvjK4+gK+uGP4C6ykIgn3HuvMPfjI=; b=EoRprmszTyo9zFdUxNOxckCImOI9RPB2T6jZfggPTDvfwT856gUZgItXGU61TwQJjH FfOMajoSnUhvKJx+Y2iXqrHCu+RrhZ5V3wNSAKf4MkoOBwe0LeM045ItNkWyH571Mi6r iqxdWld/RaXfgx1A6HgWStdG5nTyOuBJCEYcIhUT9lXjLsQoLVGfcovgfwV38eUseURC devQzT/cv0ppD7gPOQLhxVZPTKdTPsqC1IdPCn6mPiNhNQ/9zHdkm3ntAQJjd9RKx/OL wHhnp+sfHvwiQFYw2vHxITpzPKdrAkM3NmnwyOnbcI4txurTuMiPlLFnZjmvY/9rcECF cp4g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcAuH6NbQFfjZKdF3C+keRS2Gfnw+rwQ+ehxNOJzUPnT3dYL/Mxa rjY6q9dd80UAUYab
X-Received: by 10.28.215.5 with SMTP id o5mr2074488wmg.124.1496154592200; Tue, 30 May 2017 07:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:648:22b0:0:95ca:7c9:9379:d8b? ([2001:648:22b0:0:95ca:7c9:9379:d8b]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id s95sm5757664wrc.13.2017.05.30.07.29.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 30 May 2017 07:29:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
To: dickroy@alum.mit.edu, 'William Whyte' <wwhyte@onboardsecurity.com>
References: <b7d0f246-da90-ac56-db69-40e9e929900d@gmail.com> <3916AFEC-80E9-469F-A2D7-F66010AAB23C@vigilsec.com> <c40e3d6a-dd42-e2bb-8ec2-e62582454970@gmail.com> <CAND9ES2=78X4SXm34Gahz_+pH-sWTsQSk+3gZ+29rK-rBSMqGQ@mail.gmail.com> <B3423667E3EC4DA7906166729ABFDEBB@SRA6>
Cc: 'Russ Housley' <housley@vigilsec.com>, its@ietf.org
Message-ID: <ebb4f2c6-9734-b838-4e73-3ee085b19d83@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 17:29:47 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B3423667E3EC4DA7906166729ABFDEBB@SRA6>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/aVdxOz6qAHed5moHatff7HQfVWY>
Subject: Re: [ipwave] RSU minor textual issue
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, 30 May 2017 14:29:56 -0000


Le 30/05/2017 à 08:08, Dick Roy a écrit :
> And when a police car with an “OBU” parks along the side of the road
> and “becomes an RSU” by broadcasting warning messages to oncoming
> vehicles

So we could "a computer equipped with at least one IEEE 802.11 interface
operated in OCB mode, which is physically located in communications
range of vehicles but is typically not a vehicle device itself"

(remark "typically").

> while the officer(s) are out of the car perusing the scene, then
> what. Point is, OBUs and RSUs are not devices … they are roles that
> real devices can take on.

When we discuss handovers we need this RSU term because of being fixed.
  The handover nature is such a mobile device is 'handed
over' from one RSU to another, likely to be fixed.

But but.

Now I realize we moved the handover discussion out of this draft, so 
maybe the "RSU" term is not that important.  It no longer appears 
throughout the draft...

> You might want to look at ISO 21217 for definitions of all these
> things, or not.  It has been around for almost a decade however:^))))

Will have to check.

Maybe we need another term instead of RSU, that is just a computer 
running at least one interface in OCB mode, and that implements what 
this IPv6-over-OCB draft says.

Alex

>
>
>
>
> Furthermore, tying the definition of these objects to a particular
> communication interface (IEEE802.11 in OCB mode) really makes no
> sense. You would be the only standards group to take such a stance,
> and frankly, the communication interface is out of scope for the IETF
> and I would recommend against it.
>
>
>
> My two euro cents …
>
>
>
> RR
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  *From:*its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *William
> Whyte *Sent:* Monday, May 29, 2017 4:41 PM *To:* Alexandre Petrescu
> *Cc:* Russ Housley; its@ietf.org *Subject:* Re: [ipwave] RSU minor
> textual issue
>
>
>
> Hi Alex,
>
>
>
>
> RSU: Road Side Unit.  A computer equipped with at least one IEEE
> 802.11 interface operated in OCB mode.  An RSU may be connected to
> the Internet, and may be equipped with additional wired or wireless
> network interfaces running IP.
>
>
>
> This doesn't cover the difference between an RSU and an OBU :-)
>
>
>
> Maybe "a computer equipped with at least one IEEE 802.11 interface
> operated in OCB mode, which is physically located in communications
> range of vehicles but is not a vehicle device itself".
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> William
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 1:56 AM, Alexandre Petrescu
> <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 18/05/2017 à 15:33, Russ Housley a écrit :
>
>
>
> On May 18, 2017, at 5:39 AM, Alexandre Petrescu
> <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
> <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com
> <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> OLD:
>
> RSU: Road Side Unit. An IP router equipped with, or connected to, at
> least one interface that is 802.11 and that is an interface that
> operates in OCB mode.
>
>
> A comment was made stating that an RSU is not a router, and that an
> RSU may be connected to a router via an interface, e.g. Ethernet, to
> access the infrastructure if required.
>
> But I think that some Road Side Units are indeed IP routers and they
> access the infrastructure and the Internet.  This is an important
> point when using the IP protocol - be connected.
>
> I think I keep that text that way at this time.
>
> End issue.
>
>
> Alex:
>
> Some RSUs will be routers, but others will not.  For example, an RSU
> that sends messages to vehicles about foggy conditions does not need
> to be a router.  I think the definition should allow both cases.
>
>
> Russ,
>
> I propose the following new definition.  It allows both cases:
>
> RSU: Road Side Unit.  A computer equipped with at least one IEEE
> 802.11 interface operated in OCB mode.  An RSU may be connected to
> the Internet, and may be equipped with additional wired or wireless
> network interfaces running IP.
>
>
> Alex
>
>
>
>
> Russ
>
>
> _______________________________________________ its mailing list
> its@ietf.org <mailto:its@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> PLEASE UPDATE YOUR ADDRESS BOOKS WITH MY NEW ADDRESS:
> wwhyte@onboardsecurity.com <mailto:wwhyte@onboardsecurity.com>
>