[geonet/its] Internet-wide Geonetworking problem statement and challenges/open issues

<karagian@cs.utwente.nl> Fri, 15 November 2013 05:41 UTC

Return-Path: <karagian@cs.utwente.nl>
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 3EFE411E80FA for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 21:41:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.503
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.503 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id noi-HYSQPTZB for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 21:40:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EXEDGE01.ad.utwente.nl (exedge01.ad.utwente.nl [130.89.5.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29E3821F9AE3 for <its@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 21:40:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EXHUB02.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.4.229) by EXEDGE01.ad.utwente.nl (130.89.5.48) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.328.9; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 06:40:48 +0100
Received: from EXMBX23.ad.utwente.nl ([169.254.3.67]) by EXHUB02.ad.utwente.nl ([130.89.4.229]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Fri, 15 Nov 2013 06:40:48 +0100
From: karagian@cs.utwente.nl
To: its@ietf.org
Thread-Topic: Internet-wide Geonetworking problem statement and challenges/open issues
Thread-Index: Ac7hxTy/2RMNU9cxQ7y9WmyPzwNMCA==
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:40:48 +0000
Message-ID: <FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F4F3F8AA9@EXMBX23.ad.utwente.nl>
Accept-Language: nl-NL, en-US
Content-Language: nl-NL
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-mimectl: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V14.2.247.1
x-originating-ip: [86.91.134.3]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_FF1A9612A94D5C4A81ED7DE1039AB80F4F3F8AA9EXMBX23adutwent_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [geonet/its] Internet-wide Geonetworking problem statement and challenges/open issues
X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GeoNet BoF discussion list." <its.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/its>, <mailto:its-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 05:41:00 -0000

Hi all,



Below I am giving a brief problem statement description associated with Internet-wide geonetworking. This description includes the challenges/open issues that could be worked out by the IETF in a new WG. In addition to that I am aslo listing requirements that need to be addressed in order to solve these challenges/open issues.



The goal of this email is to (1) stimulate discussion, (2) modify the description of the listed challenges/open issues, (3) add new challenges and (4) modify/add requirements.


Problem:
-------------
Standardized protocol(s) is/are needed to allow source nodes anywhere in the Internet to disseminate packets to all/any node(s) with geographic location awareness within a specified destination area.

Challenges/Open issues:
------------------------

o) Mechanisms and/or protocol solutions are needed to ensure that geographical information  is available in the addressing mechanism, such that packets can be forwarded to a target geographical area.

o) Mechanisms and protocol solutions are needed to ensure that data packets generated by source nodes placed anywhere in the Internet are forwarded over multiple hops by using, where possible, the position of the destination node(s) and the positions of intermediate nodes for the routing decisions, instead of using their IP addresses.

(Note that in order to solve the above challenge it is NOT mandated that all nodes located on the path from source to destination nodes are able to forward packets using the position of the destination node(s) and the positions of intermediate nodes for the routing decisions. This is emphasized by using the words “where possible”.)


Main requirements:
---------------------
The main requirements to be satisfied on solving the above challenges, (see also:
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-karagiannis-problem-statement-geonetworking-01.txt):

o) Communication mode: The geoanycast, geounicast and geobroadcast communication modes MUST be supported by the Internet-wide geo-networking solution.

o) Security and privacy: The Internet-wide geo-networking solution MUST support security objectives for all supported communication modes. Security objectives  particularly include integrity, privacy and non-repudiation and SHOULD protect the network and transport layer protocol headers.  In addition the Internet-wide geo-networking solution MUST also protect privacy, i.e. provide confidentiality to personal data such as relation between node identifier and location.

o) Reliable communications: The Internet geo-networking solution SHOULD support reliable communications with the highest reliability for messages used for e.g., ITS traffic safety use cases.

Note that more requirements are listed in: http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-karagiannis-problem-statement-geonetworking-01.txt

Best regards,
Georgios