Re: [its] Scenarios, potential topics...

[Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alex and All,

>Scenario :  A router deployed in a moving vehicle, uses its egress
>interface to connect to larger-area access network(s) or to other
>vehicles.  <Q1>Should it use IPv6-over-LTE?  <Q2>Should it use Mobile IP?

>Open to discussion:<Q3> what are the scenarios? <Q4> What are the potential
> work items?  <Q5>What might be needed, if anything at all?

I am interested  to work on Vehicle Ad-hoc NETwork (VANET) and ITS
issues and in your questions directions. I will join the ITS-WG which
I think can have relation to MANET [RFC2501]. IMO that vehicle routers
communications depend on both their communication protocols and the
used-network for such communication (my answer of both Q1 and Q2). In
particular, to answer Q2, IMHO there is no doubt that Mobile IP
[RFC6275] is needed for the router's if the communication is through
the Internet's domain(s), but if it is through Ad-hoc networks'
domain(s) it MAY not be used. The Internet is an infrastructure
network and Ad-hoc networks are infrastructure-less networks.
Regarding Q3, Q4 and Q5 I agree with the WG answers, and will read
more into the WG inputs regarding these issues.

I will schedule to participate/prepare I-D in the future for ITS
scenarios. I am preparing an I-D on DSRv2 routing which is a MANET
routing protocol that fits the use-case of ITS and VANET as well.

Regards

Abdussalam Baryun
University of Glamorgan, UK
=======================================================

From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu at gmail.com>
To: its at ietf.org
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:38:49 +0100
Sub: [its] Scenarios, potential topics...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Welcome to the ITS list at IETF, an informal discussion.

Earlier at IETF discussions related to vehicular communications happened
in several groups (MEXT, AUTOCONF, 6MAN, to name but a few), drafts were
published [*].  At times people expressed interest to meet f2f.  Now
there is this email list.

Participants are solicited to work on the topic of using IP in
Intelligent Transportation Systems.  The term ITS is a placeholder that,
in my oppinion, is generic enough to cover many aspects of vehicular
communications; vehicles may be wheeled, watered, flown.  Ambulance,
fire engine, coastal ship are particular examples.

Scenario :  A router deployed in a moving vehicle, uses its egress
interface to connect to larger-area access network(s) or to other
vehicles.  Should it use IPv6-over-LTE?  Should it use Mobile IP?

Example potential work items:
- Reqs for IPv6 in vehicular networks
- V2V with RA
- V2R(oadside)
- VIN and IPv6 addressing
- ULA and IPv6 for vehicles
- IPv6 multicast
- ISO TC204
- IPv6 over 802.11p (IPv6-over-foo).
- open.

I am told about other vehicular drafts and discussions, that I have not
cited, existed and still exist (about e.g. ecall).  I am interested to
learn about all the vehicular activities at IETF.

Relevant std works: IEEE 802.11p, 802.22, ETSI ITS, ISO.

Open to discussion: what are the scenarios?  What are the potential work
items?  What might be needed, if anything at all?

Alex
[*]
draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-02
draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00.txt, October 2009.
draft-ietf-mext-nemo-ro-automotive-req-02, Jan. 2009.
draft-karagiannis-traffic-safety-requirements-02.txt, Feb. 2010.
draft-wakikawa-roll-invehicle-reqs-00.txt, May 2008.
draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-01.txt, Feb. 2011.
draft-petrescu-mip4-tuntype-change-00.txt, March 2011.
draft-uehara-dtnrg-decentralized-probe-message-00.txt, Nov. 2010.
draft-uehara-dtnrg-decentralized-probe-transport-00, Nov. 2010
draft-rosen-ecrit-ecall-04.txt, March 2010.
draft-singh-simple-vehicle-info, July 2007.
draft-sijeon-mext-nemo-pmip6-00, Oct. 2010.
draft-bauer-mext-aero-solspace, Sep. 2009.
draft-bauer-mext-aero-topology, Sep. 2009.
draft-bernardos-mext-aero-nemo-ro-sol-analysis, Nov. 2008.
draft-rosen-ecrit-ecall-05.txt, March 2012.