Re: [ipwave] 802.11 Data vs 802.11 QoS Data in IPv6-over-802.11-OCB-implementations

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Mon, 10 December 2018 14:58 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 113C9130EEA for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 06:58:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.632
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.632 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 vHjUDqYr5TER for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 06:58:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-smtp-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.228]) (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 478EE129533 for <its@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 06:58:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin-sys.extra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id wBAEwgxU039759; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:58:42 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id B7E6F2052C7; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:58:42 +0100 (CET)
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 A5D6F205165; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:58:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.8.68.228] ([10.8.68.228]) by muguet1-sys.intra.cea.fr (8.14.7/8.14.7/CEAnet-Internet-out-4.0) with ESMTP id wBAEwQvA026181; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:58:26 +0100
To: dickroy@alum.mit.edu
Cc: tony.li@tony.li, 'its' <its@ietf.org>, 'Abdussalam Baryun' <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
References: <CADnDZ8-CGKedTqZ8=uQAhK33LkVCx==tFwnt+Rk5hb_SDuLXzQ@mail.gmail.com> <5a98213d.d138c80a.ababc.519f@mx.google.com> <f043b46d-7661-6c62-0855-f30b1efd3622@gmail.com> <5a982375.042bed0a.1271f.4afc@mx.google.com> <86a2077a-ea46-c99b-c048-60ab78f69ec3@gmail.com> <CAND9ES0jR_J08PL6i16tuguTm3kfJ3Y2+QGEbG7ctFcQDpYZ3Q@mail.gmail.com> <c62ee1b4-de1b-6cba-2576-305b622a77da@gmail.com> <CAND9ES2dcw4F-C2kBvi0SHTvbhOEL+xFvObJrB3r81a9B9eChw@mail.gmail.com> <c642e042-0164-392f-a4ce-3b284bf97624@gmail.com> <3097ed69-7f42-1d78-2fd6-003f76e4bea3@gmail.com> <59f90174-5c80-34a8-2618-47ff29052c51@gmail.com> <CADnDZ8_1OknGHiyuy-6KQqjQ6Gkhe2=zFkZ4fo5SAHA+_wsa-Q@mail.gmail.com> <57806d48-1d1f-c179-3e55-ba154d4e8baf@gmail.com> <135A489E-AC1A-40B8-AC86-DF63CE28BC4F@gmail.com> <b4051ae8-3fb8-dc46-1dbe-07f295740616@cea.fr> <A23977B8-5C80-490B-BE80-CDEFCDE2E35B@tony.li> <ff6fc0e0-0971-9498-dabc-14d! 9e0492ab3 @gmail.com> <3AC77A1693E1490898F88D9096D4E9D2@SRA6>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <96de1ef8-8f97-b0fb-60d9-69e6fabcae4c@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:58:25 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3AC77A1693E1490898F88D9096D4E9D2@SRA6>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/mdPYE3GzYMxNq8bXJej8Dq-oe6Q>
Subject: Re: [ipwave] 802.11 Data vs 802.11 QoS Data in IPv6-over-802.11-OCB-implementations
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: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:58:50 -0000

This is all good and nice, but should IP use it QoS.  The agreement in 
the group seems to be yes, and the draft reflects that agreement.

(deployed implementations vary)

Alex

Le 07/12/2018 à 20:34, Dick Roy a écrit :
> QoS is used because DCF is used (aka EDCA).  If by “LLC” below you mean 
> anything other than “EPD”, and if it doesn’t precede the 02.11 MAC 
> header, then the Cohda implementation is not standards conformant, and I 
> believe it to be.
> 
> RR
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> *From:*its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Alexandre Petrescu
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 6, 2018 11:43 PM
> *Cc:* tony.li@tony.li; its; Abdussalam Baryun
> *Subject:* Re: [ipwave] 802.11 Data vs 802.11 QoS Data in 
> IPv6-over-802.11-OCB-implementations
> 
> Re: [ipwave] 802.11 Data vs 802.11 QoS Data in 
> IPv6-over-802.11-OCB-implementations
> 
> Hi IPWAVErs,
> 
> I need to let you know the following.
> 
> Recently programmers from router manufacturer informed me that a Cohda 
> simulator does use QoS Data headers to transport BSM messages, and not 
> Data headers.
> 
> Our agreed Internet Draft IP/OCB says that IP should use QoS Data 
> headers (and not Data headers).  So Cohda simulator could easily agree 
> to this Internet Draft.
> 
> For information, the headers of a BSM generated by a Cohda simulator and 
> displayed by a wireshark tool are like this:
> 
> Ethernet
> IPv4
> UDP
> CohdaWireless(proprietary)
> 802.11-QoSData
> LLC
> 1609.3
> 1609.2(certificate, signature)
> BSM(2016)
> 
> The precise packet dump is not available upon any request, because I do 
> not know the precise licensing conditions from router manufacturer and 
> from Cohda.
> 
> Alex
> 
> Le 15/07/2018 à 18:03, tony.li@tony.li <mailto:tony.li@tony.li> a écrit :
> 
>>
>>
>> On Jul 15, 2018, at 7:14 AM, Alexandre Petrescu 
>> <alexandre.petrescu@cea.fr <mailto:alexandre.petrescu@cea.fr>> wrote:
>>
>> In return, as a side point, I would ask whether or not a car with IPv6
>> with "Data" headers talks to an RSU which implements IPv6 "QoS Data"
>> headers?  The answer to this would be a good information point in 
>> deciding.
>>
>> Some device drivers may choose to parse both.  Some may choose to 
>> parse only one.
>>
>> I don’t see how this helps in deciding.
>>
>> Tony
>>