IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 WRA suggestion removal

Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> Sun, 12 February 2017 17:13 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 C2361129990 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 09:13:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.353
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.353 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] 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 PKf1AJRuX5aA for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 09:13:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5A8412998E for <its@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 09:13:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide.extra.cea.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.4) with ESMTP id v1CHD6Kj021629; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 18:13:06 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 4A807205CCC; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 18:13:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD10201E8F; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 18:13:06 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [132.166.84.20] ([132.166.84.20]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.4) with ESMTP id v1CHD5jc026668; Sun, 12 Feb 2017 18:13:05 +0100
To: William Whyte <wwhyte@securityinnovation.com>
References: <148052970170.9607.12043916621198119260.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2d898a92-e587-8801-4c8a-ef6fb485d785@cea.fr> <CACz1E9rudxvVcit8eJ9maGE9RwpOQ8vZh5zWgqxQRJ3s0ZP30A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d00425c3-83e7-7bb2-d46e-06a2a46d7d32@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 18:12:34 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACz1E9rudxvVcit8eJ9maGE9RwpOQ8vZh5zWgqxQRJ3s0ZP30A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/tqpNOo4M4LxpEBV1-w1U_mhcUGw>
Cc: "its@ietf.org" <its@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ipwave] draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00 WRA suggestion removal
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: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 17:13:11 -0000

If IP handovers are to rely on the presence of this WRA, then it would 
become a strong requirement on P1609.

This would mean that this WRA message would need - also - to be widely 
available, with open source implementations, for free, as the IP 
handover implementations are available.

Second, this IPv6/OCB document would hardly be a place to set 
requirements on other SDOs, such as IEEE.

In my view, it is not sure IEEE can make the WRA message mandatory, and 
widely available.

Alex

Le 10/02/2017 à 17:32, William Whyte a écrit :
> Why wouldn't this be acceptable? It's a reference to a published
> standard, it should be okay.
>
> Cheers,
>
> William
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 2:40 AM, Alexandre Petrescu
> <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>> draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-00
>> WRA suggestion removal
>>
>> Hello IPWAVErs,
>>
>> We received a warning about the draft suggesting the use of WRA (WAVE
>> Router Advertisement - an IEEE message termed like, but different than,
>> the IP Router Advertisement).  It is said that this suggestion may not
>> be acceptable by IEEE, and as such may be out of scope in this I-D.
>>
>> I will remove this old text in the Handovers section.
>>
>> old:
>>>
>>> Another alternative replacement for the IPv6 Router Advertisement
>>> may be the message 'WAVE Routing Advertisement' (WRA), which is
>>> part of the WAVE Service Advertisement and which may contain
>>> optionally the transmitter location; this message is described in
>>> section 8.2.5 of [ieeep1609.3-D9-2010].
>>
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> its mailing list
>> its@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email