Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 802.21 for IP handovers

[José Santa Lozano <[e-mail]>]

Dear Michele,

It does not only provides information about the lower layers, but also additional information that could come from an infrastructure node (for instance), providing details about the networks in the surroundings.

Anyhow, it was only a comment, since it appears that the document suggests some approaches to tackle the problem of handover, and the .21 is just another supporting technology for this issue.

Regards,

-- 
José Santa Lozano
Dept. Ingeniería de la Información y las Comunicaciones
Facultad de Informática
Universidad de Murcia
30100 Murcia, Spain
Telf: [phone] / [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Web: http://ants.inf.um.es/~josesanta <http://ants.inf.um.es/~josesanta>



> El 14 feb 2017, a las 12:14, Michelle Wetterwald <[e-mail]> escribió:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I am not sure about involving 802.21 here. Its main achievement is to provide an abstraction layer that helps understand the status of the lower layers. It can be quite useful to trigger a handover in any type of scenario involving mobility. 
> However, in any case, it does not intend to replace the IPv6 router advertisement and an IPv6 node would not be able to configure its address using 802.21 only. So I suggest to keep the old text in the bottom email below. 
> 
> Best regards,
> Michelle Wetterwald
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> ----
> Senior expert in networking and telecommunications
> 
> 
> 2017-02-14 10:20 GMT+01:00 José Santa Lozano <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>:
> Dear Dick,
> 
> You are right :-). It is an issue to embrace several telecomm. providers in order to achieve such scenario.  However, this is subject to future agreements out of our control, and this kind of support services could be even externally provided, offering information about networks in the surroundings, independently of the operator… For sure it is something to be exploited in the future. Imagine that we are still waiting for IPv6 support from many operators…
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Jose.
> 
> 
> 
>> El 13 feb 2017, a las 18:27, Dick Roy <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> escribió:
>> 
>> There seems to be some confusion here.  BSMs/CAMs are generally NOT sent from roadside units; they are sent from vehicular ITS-Ss.  Secondly, other than the silly restriction in the US on CH178 and the J2945/1 restriction on Ch172, IPv6 frames can be sent on any channel, including IPv6 RAs.  Finally, the WRA is included in a WSA and can be sent on ANY channel as a WSM (i.e. using WSMP).
>>  
>> Use of 802.21 functions and services to help with heterogeneous handovers is a good idea and should be pursued.  Let me know if you know of ANY operator of a wide area cellular system (LTE, 3G, etc.) that has agreed to implement ANY of 802.21 for handing off its traffic to some other network :^)))
>>  
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> RR
>>  
>> From: José Santa Lozano [mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>] 
>> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 12:52 AM
>> To: Alexandre Petrescu
>> Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>> Subject: Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 802.21 for IP handovers
>>  
>> Dear Alex,
>>  
>> Thanks for considering the comment.
>>  
>> Nevertheless, we also use RA in our solution in order to detect an 802.11p access router. The usage of 802.21 is an additional source of information to speed-up the selection of the most convenient point of attachment or communication flow to use. Due to this, let me propose a text that could be placed at the end of the former version of that paragraph:
>>  
>> "Additionally, IEEE 802.21 can be used to improve the network selection process, since it provides standardized mechanisms to monitor parameters of the local transceiver (e.g. the RSSI sensed from a RSU) and the reception of external information from an infrastructure node about the surrounding networks (e.g. area coverage or monetary cost)"
>>  
>> Just a suggestion.
>>  
>> Jose.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>> El 12 feb 2017, a las 19:05, Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> escribió:
>>>  
>>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00
>>> 802.21 for IP handovers
>>> 
>>> Hello IPWAVErs,
>>> 
>>> José Santa Lozano commented that their implementation can rely on 802.21
>>> (instead of WSA-with-WRA-field or RA) to realize IP handovers in 802.11-OCB.
>>> 
>>> The old text is this:
>>> 
>>> One such message may be the 802.11p’s Time Advertisement, or higher
>>> layer messages such as the "Basic Safety Message" (in the US) or the
>>> "Cooperative Awareness Message " (in the EU), that are usually sent
>>> several times per second. Another alternative replacement for the
>>> IPv6 Router Advertisement may be the message ’WAVE Routing
>>> Advertisement’ (WRA), which is part of the WAVE Service
>>> Advertisement and which may contain optionally the transmitter
>>> location; this message is described in section 8.2.5 of
>>> [ieeep1609.3-D9-2010].
>>> 
>>> New, if at all:
>>> 
>>> One such message may be the 802.11p’s Time Advertisement, or higher
>>> layer messages such as the "Basic Safety Message" (in the US) or the
>>> "Cooperative Awareness Message " (in the EU), that are usually sent
>>> several times per second. Another alternative replacement for the
>>> IPv6 Router Advertisement may be the message ’WAVE Routing
>>> Advertisement’ (WRA), which is part of the WAVE Service Advertisement
>>> and which may contain optionally the transmitter location; this
>>> message is described in section 8.2.5 of [ieeep1609.3-D9-2010].  Yet
>>> another alternative replacement for IPv6 RA is the involvement of
>>> 802.21 signal levels, or additional 802.21 entities,
>>> 
>>> Alex
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> its mailing list
>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> its mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Michelle Wetterwald
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>