Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 no IPv6 prohibition on the control channel

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Hello Jérôme,

Le 11/02/2017 à 15:09, Jérôme Härri a écrit :
> Hello Alex,
>
> I do not fully understand your argument about your country not
> imposing restriction

Because I have not seen such restriction forbidding IP, in the ARCEP
regulatory body controlling the use of 5.9GHz band.

> and why you prefer MAY NOT.

I agree.  When adding a NOT it looses your intention, and mine too.

> Your proposed new formulation gives the impression that in most
> countries, IPv6 is restricted...which is not the case actually. My
> formulation was the opposite, claiming that in general there is no
> restriction, but in some cases, maybe. I still think 'MAY' should
> remain, as it would not pose any problem in the country where you
> leave.

I think your formulation makes think there may be countries where the
regulator authority forbids IP on some 5.9GHz channel.

Do we know an example country where the frequency regulation authority
(e.g. that country's FCC) forbids the use of IP on some 5.9GHz channel?

Until now all we see is IEEE P1609 making such restriction.

Alex
>
>
> BR,
>
> Jérôme
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Alexandre Petrescu
> [mailto:[e-mail]] Sent: Friday 10 February 2017
> 13:39 To: Jérôme Härri; [e-mail] Subject: Re: [ipwave]
> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 no IPv6 prohibition on the
> control channel
>
>
>
> Le 10/02/2017 à 13:00, Jérôme Härri a écrit :
>> Hello Alex,
>>
>> As discussed, there is a strick prohibition from ETSI and IEEE
>> WAVE. But, as this work will not use it, we do not need to comply
>> with it. We only need to comply with national spectrum
>> regulations...whatever is in there...
>>
>> I would however suggest to add the following statement:
>> "Transmissions of IPv6 packets on ITS spectrum SHALL comply with
>> the national spectrum regulations, which MAY lead to restrictions
>> on IP operations using IEEE 802.11-2016 in OCB mode."
>
> Jérôme,
>
> I agree with the first part, that I can add.
>
> The national spectrum regulation in the country where I live does
> not lead to restrictions on IP operations using 802.11 in OCB mode.
>
> So I could say:
>> "Transmissions of IPv6 packets on ITS spectrum SHALL comply with
>> the national spectrum regulations, which MAY NOT lead to
>> restrictions on IP operations using IEEE 802.11-2016 in OCB mode."
>
> Alex
>
>>
>> I think this leaves flexibility for this WG to propose solutions..
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Jérôme
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: its [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu Sent: Friday 10 February 2017
>> 12:05 To: [e-mail] Subject: [ipwave]
>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 no IPv6 prohibition on the
>> control channel
>>
>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 no IPv6 prohibition on the
>> control channel
>>
>> Hello IPWAVErs,
>>
>> We received a comment stating that LCC/OBE does not prohibit the
>> use of IPv6 on the control channel.  (I do not understand what the
>> commenter meant meant by "LCC" - typo for FCC, LLC? or Lower
>> Control Channel? but that's another issue).
>>
>> As such I will remove the following text:
>>> On another hand, at IEEE, IPv6 is explicitely prohibited on
>>> channel number 178 decimal - the FCC's 'Control Channel'.  The
>>> document [ieeep1609.4-D9-2010] prohibits upfront the use of IPv6
>>> traffic on the Control Channel: 'data frames containing IP
>>> datagrams are only allowed on service channels'.  Other 'Service
>>> Channels' are allowed to use IP, but the Control Channel is not.
>>
>> There are many other reasons for removing that text that we
>> discussed here extensively.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>>
>
>