Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 .11-OCB (non) use of beacons

Jerome Haerri <jerome.haerri@eurecom.fr> Thu, 02 February 2017 16:00 UTC

Return-Path: <jerome.haerri@eurecom.fr>
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 36AAC129479 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 08:00:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] 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 RzSxjEMhdYTg for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 08:00:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp2.eurecom.fr (smtp3.eurecom.fr [193.55.113.213]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C1D612969E for <its@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 08:00:10 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,325,1477954800"; d="scan'208";a="5715098"
Received: from waha.eurecom.fr (HELO smtps.eurecom.fr) ([10.3.2.236]) by drago2i.eurecom.fr with ESMTP; 02 Feb 2017 17:00:09 +0100
Received: from [10.133.126.219] (unknown [80.12.55.219]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtps.eurecom.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E657D8C; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 17:00:08 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Jerome Haerri <jerome.haerri@eurecom.fr>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14D27)
In-Reply-To: <687e75fd-7e89-211e-bce3-fea861d7baf0@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:00:06 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2B86CDDB-C9AA-4605-B9B6-3DA6F2ABBE7F@eurecom.fr>
References: <148052970170.9607.12043916621198119260.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <222853d1-235d-cd4e-844b-4ea6091bfb2b@cea.fr> <009901d27c83$3bd599e0$b380cda0$@eurecom.fr> <ABE9BD89094E4DCBA199B459F8176F2E@SRA6> <687e75fd-7e89-211e-bce3-fea861d7baf0@gmail.com>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/qX1k0SxvDUAFwwvhLKOuw4VNiXs>
Cc: dickroy@alum.mit.edu, its@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 .11-OCB (non) use of beacons
X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 02 Feb 2017 16:00:13 -0000

Dear Alex,

well, If I cross on red lights, we cannot then say that as I did, then crossing on red lights is allowed..

if OCB implementations are sending beacons, then it is an implementation issue..it does not mean that beacons should be transmitted by the standards..

Would still suggest to keep the original version or cut-past the exact statement from 802.11-2016 about allowed messages in OCB mode.

But just asking frankly: why do you want to keep this statement about beacons (allowing them to be sent) ? we spend too much time on useless details and not on other key issues..

Best Regards,

Jérôme

Envoyé de mon iPhone

> Le 2 févr. 2017 à 16:20, Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> But some OCB implementations do send Beacons.
> 
> In that sense, I propose to say the following.
> 
>>> 4.  Aspects introduced by the OCB mode to 802.11
>>> 
>>> In the IEEE 802.11 OCB mode, all nodes in the wireless range can
>>> directly communicate with each other without authentication/
>>> association procedures.  Briefly, the IEEE 802.11 OCB mode has the
>>> following properties:
>>> 
>>> o  Wildcard BSSID (i.e., all bits are set to 1) used by each node
> 
> old:
>>> o  No beacons transmitted
> 
> new:
>>> o  OCB implementations do not receive beacons and most OCB
>>> implementations do not transmit Beacons.
> 
> Alex
> 
> 
>> Le 01/02/2017 à 20:20, Dick Roy a écrit :
>> To reiterate, in OCB operation there are NO beacons and there are NO
>> APs.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> RR
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> *From:*Jérôme Härri [mailto:jerome.haerri@eurecom.fr] *Sent:*
>> Wednesday, February 1, 2017 4:04 AM *To:* 'Alexandre Petrescu';
>> its@ietf.org *Subject:* Re: [ipwave]
>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 .11-OCB does use beacons
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I do not agree and I would be happy to have the reference in the
>> IEEE 802.11-2016 stating otherwise.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> In the 802.11 standard, it clearly state the following line:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> When dot11OCBActivated is true in a STA:
>> 
>> " The STA _may send management frames of subtype Action_ and, if the
>> STA maintains a TSF Timer, subtype Timing Advertisement "
>> 
>> " The STA may send _control frames_, _except_ those of _subtype
>> PS-Poll, CF-End, and CF-End + CFAck_ "
>> 
>> " The STA may send _data frames of subtype Data, Null, QoS Data, and
>> QoS Null_. "
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> A beacon is a management frame, but not of a class Action, so it
>> _cannot be transmitted when dot11OCBActivated_ is true in a STA. But
>> I agree that it is ambiguous…nevertheless, I would then replace in
>> the draft the mention of what OCB can do or can’t do (e.g. sending
>> beacons) with the exact 802.11-2016 statements. This would avoid
>> misunderstanding.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> But even if it could be possible, this does not make much sense. A
>> beacon is transmitted on a channel you need to connect to get BSS
>> information and also to get the right frequency. In case of OCB
>> (outside context of a BSS), it is not required. But the real question
>> is ‘why’ would we need beacon, assuming it could be transmitted?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Jérôme
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: its [mailto:its-bounces@ietf.org] On
>> Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu Sent: Wednesday 01 February 2017 11:51
>> To: its@ietf.org Subject: [ipwave]
>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 .11-OCB does use beacons
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 .11-OCB does use beacons
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hello IPWAVErs,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> It was suggested in private that, contrary to what the draft says,
>> the .11-OCB does use beacons.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> As such, the following line should disappear from the draft:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 4.  Aspects introduced by the OCB mode to 802.11
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> In the IEEE 802.11 OCB mode, all nodes in the wireless range can
>> 
>>> directly communicate with each other without authentication/
>> 
>>> association procedures.  Briefly, the IEEE 802.11 OCB mode has the
>> 
>>> following properties:
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> o  Wildcard BSSID (i.e., all bits are set to 1) used by each node
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> o  [strike through] No beacons transmitted
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Yours,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> 
>>