Re: [ipwave] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26.txt

Hi Dirk,
I will address your comments on the revision.

You are right.
AERO uses Automatic instead of Asymmetric in the latest version.

Thanks.

Best Regards,
Paul

2022년 2월 23일 (수) 오전 12:45, <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de>님이 작성:

> Dear Fred, Paul, Russ and all,
>
> From my point of view - only loosely following this discussion - I do
> agree that Paul has achieved a good balance between different protocols
> included/mentioned. Thanks for that!
>
>
>
> Just a small typo: on page 3 it should also read
>
> ‘Automatic Extended Route Optimization (AERO)’ instead of ‘Asymmetric
> Extended Route Optimization (AERO)’
>
> And maybe one could add on p. 14 the sentence
>
> ‘Refer to Appendix A for the description how OMNI can support use of
> multiple radio technologies in V2X’.
>
>
>
> Would that help? What do you think?
>
> Thanks
>
> Best regards
>
> Dirk
>
>
>
> *Von:* its <its-bounces@ietf.org> *Im Auftrag von *Templin (US), Fred L
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 22. Februar 2022 15:35
> *An:* Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>; Russ Housley <
> housley@vigilsec.com>
> *Cc:* its@ietf.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [ipwave] I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26.txt
>
>
>
> The way the document is now, it reads as an endorsement for a particular
> approach.
>
> The document was good last time I read it (which is a while ago) but I
> guess someone
>
> got you to make drastic changes without my knowing about it. The document
> cannot
>
> go forward in its current form.
>
>
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> *From:* Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong [mailto:jaehoon.paul@gmail.com
> <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* Monday, February 21, 2022 7:50 PM
> *To:* Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>; Templin (US), Fred L <
> Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
> *Cc:* its@ietf.org; Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [ipwave] I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26.txt
>
>
>
> EXT email: be mindful of links/attachments.
>
>
>
>
> Hi Russ,
>
> I have replied to Fred's email just before.
>
> As the editor, I tried to balance the two approaches even though the text
> of AERO/OMNI is reduced.
>
>
>
> Fred,
>
> I hope you can understand my position as the editor.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 5:26 AM Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
>
> Paul and Fred:
>
> I think the update is more aligned with the documents that are advancing
> one the IETF stream.  That said, I would not be apposed to the inclusion of
> the 6M's, but not in a way that claims that there is only one approach way
> to address these things.  What do you think about that was a way forward?
>
> Russ
>
>
> > On Feb 21, 2022, at 2:56 PM, Templin (US), Fred L <
> Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, I started reviewing this and found that it has been completely
> overhauled since I put my
> > comments in many months ago. It has in fact been completely rewritten to
> favor the shared
> > IPv6 multilink subnet model over multihop networks, to favor RPL/6LowPan
> over standard
> > MANET routing protocols, to favor IPv6 ND changes over standard IPv6 ND,
> and to favor
> > multilink DAD. None of that is necessary with AERO/OMNI and the
> NBMA-based virtual link
> > created by the OMNI Adaptation. So, I stopped midway through marking up
> the document
> > with my comments because it has taken a complete left turn and started
> down a wrong path.
> >
> > What is mainly at the heart of the divergence is that the document now
> embraces the
> > multilink IPv6 subnet model vs the AERO/OMNI NBMA link model that was
> there the last
> > time I looked. But, there is no need for such complication when there is
> a much simpler
> > alternative at hand. I notice also that in the appendices the AERO/OMNI
> "6M's of Mobile
> > Internetworking" was removed - at the very least that needs to be
> restored.
> >
> > In its current form, this document has been diverted to go down the
> wrong path. It
> > needs to be either re-balanced or re-written.
> >
> > Thanks - Fred
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Templin (US),
> Fred L
> >> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2022 7:28 AM
> >> To: its@ietf.org; i-d-announce@ietf.org
> >> Subject: Re: [ipwave] I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26.txt
> >>
> >> Hi, it looks like a lot of what was in the draft regarding AERO/OMNI
> has been cut out
> >> so that means I am going to have to re-review it. I will get to this a
> soon as possible;
> >> hopefully in the next couple of days.
> >>
> >> Fred
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> internet-drafts@ietf.org
> >>> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2022 9:00 PM
> >>> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> >>> Cc: its@ietf.org
> >>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [ipwave] I-D Action:
> draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26.txt
> >>>
> >>> EXT email: be mindful of links/attachments.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> >>> This draft is a work item of the IP Wireless Access in Vehicular
> Environments WG of the IETF.
> >>>
> >>>        Title           : IPv6 Wireless Access in Vehicular
> Environments (IPWAVE): Problem Statement and Use Cases
> >>>        Author          : Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong
> >>>     Filename        : draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26.txt
> >>>     Pages           : 49
> >>>     Date            : 2022-02-20
> >>>
> >>> Abstract:
> >>>   This document discusses the problem statement and use cases of
> >>>   IPv6-based vehicular networking for Intelligent Transportation
> >>>   Systems (ITS).  The main scenarios of vehicular communications are
> >>>   vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), and
> >>>   vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications.  First, this document
> >>>   explains use cases using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking.  Next, for
> >>>   IPv6-based vehicular networks, it makes a gap analysis of current
> >>>   IPv6 protocols (e.g., IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management,
> >>>   and Security & Privacy), and then enumerates requirements for the
> >>>   extensions of those IPv6 protocols for IPv6-based vehicular
> >>>   networking.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> >>>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking/
> >>>
> >>> There is also an htmlized version available at:
> >>>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26
> >>>
> >>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> >>>
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-26
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org:
> :internet-drafts
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > its mailing list
> > its@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>
> --
===========================
Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department Head
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Email: pauljeong@skku.edu, jaehoon.paul@gmail.com
Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
<http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php>