Re: [ipwave] 802.11bd D1.0 preliminary spec available somewhere?

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Thu, 10 September 2020 10:33 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandre.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 691DE3A0365 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 03:33:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.948, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 3uOoH03Q7mvZ for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 03:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.148]) (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 A7A243A02BC for <its@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 03:32:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 08AAWtLv017571; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:32:55 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 8CC7120483D; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:32:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr (muguet1-smtp-out.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.12]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B14A2047B8; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:32:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.8.35.150] (is154594.intra.cea.fr [10.8.35.150]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id 08AAWt1M022280; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:32:55 +0200
To: dickroy@alum.mit.edu, "'John Kenney'" <jkenney@us.toyota-itc.com>
Cc: "'IPWAVE WG'" <its@ietf.org>
References: <fa3ec50d-1338-f12a-cf37-3f5502f13c94@gmail.com> <CAP6QOWQ8gGnyYUeof5ajzajk1xdW3Gqkmx--+ZkSoaZYN4ShMQ@mail.gmail.com> <9b780ad5-3892-36ef-762d-58f1d186a94d@gmail.com> <04857EE4CB264A50B80347971C0A4030@SRA6> <35a5909e-50b3-49c6-7998-69c809f14b57@gmail.com> <B3C884FEB2BF448691F36217D1B16945@SRA6>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <95690a67-566e-9fa8-e73d-12bdeae89593@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 12:32:55 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B3C884FEB2BF448691F36217D1B16945@SRA6>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/lXZbt77ywqOJxqExYDsaqMCNf3E>
Subject: Re: [ipwave] 802.11bd D1.0 preliminary spec available somewhere?
X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 10 Sep 2020 10:33:01 -0000


Le 10/09/2020 à 11:41, Dick Roy a écrit :
> Standards relevant to layer 3 can and often do mention IP and the
> relevant RFCs.  Standards relevant to other layers should not have
> any need to reference protocols at other layers in ay normative way
> ... that's the whole point of the layered model and layer separation.
> Any attempts to violate the layer separation principle do so at their
> own peril.

YEs layer separation, but there are interfaces between layers, right?

I mean, if RFC8691 specifies that the MTU must a be of a minimum
1280bytes, then the MAC should satisfy that by fragmenting and
reassembling where necessary, if necessary.

If RFC8691 says that the frame format below IP must use QoS Data headers
then 802.11bd wouldnt say otherwise.

If RFC8691 says that the priority value must be '1' in the QoS data
header (at the MAC layer) then 802.11bd wouldnt say otherwise, right?

Alex

> 
> RR
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 2:07
> AM To: dickroy@alum.mit.edu; 'John Kenney' Cc: 'IPWAVE WG' Subject:
> Re: [ipwave] 802.11bd D1.0 preliminary spec available somewhere?
> 
> 
> 
> Le 10/09/2020 à 09:18, Dick Roy a écrit :
>> Hi Alex,
>> 
>> FYI ... there is very little if anything in any IEEE 802 LAN 
>> specification that in any way specifies or constrains what happens 
>> in any network layer protocol.  (W)LANs operate at layer 2 and 
>> below. IPvx is functionality at layer 3.
> 
> True enough.
> 
> However, when looking at details of the specs, it might that 802.11 
> documents do use the words 'IP' and 'IPv6' in particular.  Last time
> I looked at an 802.11 spec I was successful in searching and finding
> the word IPv6.  That was some years ago.
> 
> Now the situation is different.  The word should be there, but it
> should cite [RFC 8691] in the case of OCB operation of 802.11.
> 
> I mean, if the word 'IPv6' is there in the 802.11bd document, then
> it makes no sense to not cite RFC 8691.
> 
> If the word 'IPv6' is not there in the 802.11bd document, then indeed
> it makes sense to not cite RFC 8691.
> 
> (I would be tempted to suggest the same to ISO TC204 documents but I 
> know you will not agree because I know in your thought this RFC8691
> does not fully address one's expectations of fully variable wireless 
> environments of automobile networks; so I dont suggest it for ISO TC
> 204).
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Alex
> 
>> 
>> Hope this helps...
>> 
>> RR
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] 
>> On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 
>> 12:08 AM To: John Kenney Cc: IPWAVE WG Subject: Re: [ipwave]
>> 802.11bd D1.0 preliminary spec available somewhere?
>> 
>> Hi, John,
>> 
>> Thank you for the reply.
>> 
>> Does the document mention the word 'IPv6'? (RFC8691?)
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> Le 09/09/2020 à 23:41, John Kenney a écrit :
>>> Hi Alex,
>>> 
>>> No, this is a work in progress, scheduled to be completed later 
>>> this month. It will be a draft standard. Unless a decision is
>>> made to make it available for sale, it will only be available to
>>> IEEE 802.11 WG voting members.
>>> 
>>> Best Regards, John
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 5:49 AM Alexandre Petrescu 
>>> <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am looking for the IEEE 802.11bd D1.0 preliminary spec.  Is it 
>>> available somewhere I could look at it?
>>> 
>>> It is to see whether, hopefully, it cites RFC8691 for IPv6 use.
>>> 
>>> Alex
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ its mailing list 
>>> its@ietf.org <mailto:its@ietf.org> 
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- John Kenney Director and Sr. Principal Researcher Toyota 
>>> InfoTech Labs 465 Bernardo Avenue Mountain View, CA 94043 Tel: 
>>> 650-694-4160. Mobile: 650-224-6644
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ 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
>