Re: [ipwave] C-V2X cheap cards or modules?

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Jérôme,

Thank you for the reply, which looks promising.

Maybe it could help with the use-case 'lane merging' from ITU and with 
the I-D draft-jeong-6man-ipv6-over-5g-v2x-01.

Alex

Le 20/10/2023 à 17:34, Jerome Haerri a écrit :
> Hi Alex,
>
> Well usually 'cheap' is not a good synonym to 3GPP technologies. In EURECOM we use Quectel devices for our 5G/6G devel. Quectel provides M.2 connectivity and the 'real' chip is a qualcom chipset. I saw on their website that their new Quectel will use the latest snapdragon having 5G NR UL/DL and 4G LTE SL/V2X (AG55xQ). I did not have time so far to buy some and test, but you can check on their website...
>
> https://www.quectel.com/product/5g-c-v2x-ag55xq-automotive-module
>
> (you can see that C-V2X is 'very' misleading as Dick mentions regularly, as in that context C-V2X means 4G LTE V2X and not 5G NR). Quectel has various chips if you want 5G NR + C-V2X or only C-V2X...The main issue I see is that the form factor is LGA and not M.2.
>   
> You will need to get a daughter board to fix it to a USB3 connector and get 4 antennas (and their cabling) for the 5G NR, 2 antennas for the ITS/V2X band and a GPS antenna as well. On the product description, the output power is not specified. I would assume it is the same as the pure LTE V2X from quectel (Class 3 23dBm), but it does not say anything. Let me know on private mail if you need more details,
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jérôme
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Friday, 20 October 2023 14:10
> To: [e-mail]; 'Jérôme Härri' <[e-mail]>; 'IPWAVE WG' <[e-mail]>
> Subject: C-V2X cheap cards or modules? (was: Re: [ipwave] what is C-V2X: PC5 mode 4 'sidelink' without infrastructure, or V2I?)
>
> Hi,
>
> I am looking for C-V2X cheap cards or modules to be used in PCs.
>
> Earlier it was suggested 'WNC', but the WNC URL no longer works.
> https://www.wnc.com.tw/index.php?action=pro_cate_third_close&top_id=106&scid=123&tid=145
>
> What is a cheap C-V2X card (mini PCIe, or M.2, or USB, or similar)?
>
> Alex
>
> Le 28/10/2021 à 22:22, Dick Roy a écrit :
>> I suggest everyone STOP using C-V2X altogether.  Eliminate it from
>> your vocabulary.  As indicated below, use the right term for the
>> technology being referred to and there will be no ambiguity.
>>
>> RR
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>>
>> *From:*its [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Jérôme Härri
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 28, 2021 7:18 AM
>> *To:* 'Alexandre Petrescu'; 'IPWAVE WG'
>> *Subject:* Re: [ipwave] what is C-V2X: PC5 mode 4 'sidelink' without
>> infrastructure, or V2I?
>>
>> Dear Alex,
>>
>> I forgot one point: both LTE V2X and NR V2X from the 3GPP
>> specifications include PC5 and Uu support for both control and data
>> planes. As Dirk indicated, there is not such a V2X name restricting to
>> purely V2V, a least from 3GPP perspective.
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Jérôme
>>
>> *From:*its <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of *Jérôme Härri
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 28 October 2021 15:56
>> *To:* 'Alexandre Petrescu' <[e-mail]>; 'IPWAVE WG'
>> <[e-mail]>
>> *Subject:* Re: [ipwave] what is C-V2X: PC5 mode 4 'sidelink' without
>> infrastructure, or V2I?
>>
>> Dear Alex,
>>
>> My perception: C-V2X is US terminology and applied initially as LTE
>> V2X rel.14 but now it is used for NR V2X Rel.16 to differentiate from
>> LTE V2X Rel.14 (again, in the US).
>>
>> My suggestion is: we use the standard names… 3GPP LTE V2X rel.14 or
>> 3GPP NR V2X rel. 16  at least we have a ‘clear’ understanding of what
>> it means and not means (and here, the release numbers are important…as
>> (now wanted to add more confusion), there is a 3GPP LTE V2X rel.15
>> with a minor modification on the V2X PHY, but which makes it NOT
>> background compatible with 3GPP LTE V2X rel.14…
>>
>> Also, when we refer to 3GPP NR V2X rel.16, we only have one and only
>> one specified scheduler (mode 2(a)) which is more or less the same as
>> the one from LTE V2X rel.14. As far as I know, 3GPP is discussing the
>> other modes (mode 2 (b)(c)(d) in further releases)…and well, any NR
>> V2X rel. 16 mode 1 will not be published and available as we can expect.
>>
>> Yet, if you want to make it short and generic, we can use LTE V2X and
>> NR V2X, or 5G NR V2X (although the 5G is just for branding in that case).
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Jérôme
>>
>> *From:*its <[e-mail]> *On Behalf Of *Alexandre Petrescu
>> *Sent:* Thursday, 28 October 2021 15:25
>> *To:* IPWAVE WG <[e-mail]>
>> *Subject:* [ipwave] what is C-V2X: PC5 mode 4 'sidelink' without
>> infrastructure, or V2I?
>>
>> A few definitions of C-V2X circulate:
>>
>> C-V2X is LTE PC5 interface mode 4 'sidelink': it means it works only
>> in a V2V or V2P manner, and thus C-V2X does not need infrastructure.
>> This has been said a few times.
>>
>> C-V2X means also V2I.  This is said by e.g. the SIM8100 module
>> description saying "The SIM8100 is a C-V2X module which supports C-V2X
>> functionality through a PC5 interface for vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V),
>> vehicle-to-pedestrian (V2P), and vehicle-toinfrastructure (V2I)
>> applications" at https://www.simcom.com/product/SIM8100.html or "The
>> module will most commonly be found in telematics boxes, telematics
>> control units, advanced driver-assistance systems, C-V2X (V2V, _V2I_,
>> V2P) systems)" at
>> https://www.quectel.com/product/5g-c-v2x-ag55xq-series
>>
>> What do you think?  Does C-V2X need infrastructure or can C-V2X work
>> without infrastructure?
>>
>> This is can guide our activity of IPv6 for C-V2X.
>>
>> Alex
>>