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

[Jérôme Härri <[e-mail]>]

Hello Alex,

I do not fully understand your argument about your country not imposing
restriction and why you prefer MAY NOT. 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.
 

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
>
>
>