Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-11
"Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com> Wed, 06 November 2019 02:29 UTC
Return-Path: <jaehoon.paul@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 1A3BD120826 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 18:29:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.988
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.988 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HK_NAME_FM_MR_MRS=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 sxkvxgCFlUg7 for <its@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 18:29:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22f.google.com (mail-lj1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 264A3120154 for <its@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 18:29:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id v8so8569185ljh.5 for <its@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:29:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=UypgfB+0RMBxcvjQR+Q9uiDioldcVsa48IwYN1A5hdg=; b=E8v3+Lc+YamtDMYC3ridvkBIphE7Q3XWn7jwfHZsgIByfblofCxgoGWy88aTEELrNM bYgCm57uOwM1PcFZRFCIxvZ61EzlFr7ZIoHZeDczlxoi20fmf0HbzWUgetGKoMfYV1w6 s8Wv6CmnWEetCN0Cw4mNO6SEdtVWXXfZePw/i089ULKRtssfBe4gBoCgz7QsjjxeQyPE 5GVAnfEObuC+YF294S8/lnlrzVh2btEo8BJ6ogkkBT5Be4iVD0TfRiyh5FZUWzEqzxVo misQv+w4iX9mVq+6qBWRe+8xe9TKOyw32fOL0UbOXuC7rO0agVkMCbqidyM3XFoiahT+ Libw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=UypgfB+0RMBxcvjQR+Q9uiDioldcVsa48IwYN1A5hdg=; b=qgSmFXSs8rBjTaATuAwD6ivMZrnLeOq5GfRUmUwteJkQNRjW7yNtjEnAnqgbjuz7RB gqM0Uz2226hSFN0s7PSH/0Kda5HA1aH644G7sTljbTJbRHby1Liis1lTpS2zIc8voj+Q BdrM7wBaMzcjZIKmdTq8SZJdkR3l+Y05Neo/xmTX3sV8mxmbhalvUIQDfRZI6aJmwxYe VEEb3rhxD577Vp6UOjXy641TUH4yibyOOMAnmi7szZgmJS1qaNWNlsbxRFn3tAa/K/Z5 Pqsl0+aLZxQ53RMrBMLOPrV50DsE+PKdGcsgo5V6HnHWbESaYnBhThxd6kfjN4VR3tEs SU1A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWNzZvuAahCVTCzEbt4fi7DOvPeZLOlEJklfU8mMj3pr9NPuCbX 1WXEVO/PvY75PwAM0crqfOI8R2sgsXU8o/yTzDA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzNwQFLpF0h0bJUWSXlcn4iCgIZZodnEmUvdq0VeVDRSqOQPSm6LwcbPMRVr4VvmbEApxI/BeucYw8V6Wn9EBk=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:22c1:: with SMTP id i184mr255989lji.1.1573007369198; Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:29:29 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a93e3290-e31f-dbd2-a39c-2895026f59ee@earthlink.net> <CAPK2Dexd=Zo9B3GfoHEvTUGCVyK1X+spVS168ONzWO8tDrp1OQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPK2DexXyT0pdu6Bjptj3AZL8VwsNbK=K1-UGkKyYL+1eQFquQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALypLp8c6kOf1MVP9vvk3-77PVQco_FWkc0cstBzVfdFUEtufg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALypLp8c6kOf1MVP9vvk3-77PVQco_FWkc0cstBzVfdFUEtufg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:28:53 +0900
Message-ID: <CAPK2DexyKTyfZaUR81YFHEWrFREutoXVmsZQ8Q2pCud5Wx_Cww@mail.gmail.com>
To: CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
Cc: its@ietf.org, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Suresh Krishnan <Suresh@kaloom.com>, skku-iotlab-members@googlegroups.com, 김증일 글로벌R&D마스터 <endland@hyundai.com>, "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007861b90596a451f0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/its/udy3BtTKUz5z9p-Zatjwxc0eggs>
Subject: Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-11
X-BeenThere: its@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 02:29:34 -0000
Hi Carlos, I am wondering what next steps our IPWAVE PS draft will take. If you are satisfied with my revision, could you do the WG Last Call on this version? https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-12 Thanks. Best Regards, Paul On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:19 AM CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO <cjbc@it.uc3m.es> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Thanks for the revision. I'll review the document and let you know about > next steps. > > Carlos > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 12:12 PM Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong < > jaehoon.paul@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Russ and Carlos, >> I have submitted the revision (-12) of IPWAVE PS draft as you know. >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-12 >> >> Will you review the revision and move forward to the WGLC or wait for >> Charlie's another review? >> >> BTW, my SKKU team are working for IETF-106 IPWAVE Hackathon Project to >> show the data delivery >> between two 802.11-OCB embedded systems such as the text and web-camera >> video. >> We will work to demonstrate the IPv6 over 802.11-OCB. >> This is a collaboration work with Hyundai Motors. >> >> Thanks. >> >> Best Regards, >> Paul >> >> ---------- Forwarded message --------- >> From: Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong <jaehoon.paul@gmail.com> >> Date: Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 6:57 PM >> Subject: Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for >> draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-11 >> To: Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net> >> Cc: its@ietf.org <its@ietf.org>, Sandra Cespedes <scespedes@ing.uchile.cl>, >> <skku-iotlab-members@skku.edu>, Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong < >> jaehoon.paul@gmail.com> >> >> >> Hi Charlie, >> I have addressed your comments below and your editorial changes, >> submitting the revision: >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-12 >> >> Also, I addressed Sandra's comments about the definition of an RSU as an >> edge computing system >> having multiple routers and servers (including DNS server), as shown in >> Figure 2. >> >> I attach the revision letter for your double-checking. >> >> Thanks for your valuable and constructive comments. >> >> Best Regards, >> Paul >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 1:08 PM Charlie Perkins < >> charles.perkins@earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>> Hello folks, >>> >>> I made a review of the document >>> draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-11.txt. Besides editorial >>> comments, I had some other more substantive comments on the document, as >>> follows. >>> >>> First, I thought that the document should contain an easily identifiable >>> problem statement. Here is some text that I devised for that purpose, >>> which could fit naturally at the beginning of Section 5. >>> >>> In order to specify protocols using the abovementioned architecture >>> for VANETs, IPv6 core protocols have to be adapted to overcome >>> certain >>> challenging aspects of vehicular networking. Since the vehicles are >>> likely to be moving at great speed, protocol exchanges need to be >>> completed in a time relatively small compared to the lifetime of a >>> link between a vehicle and an RSU, or between two vehicles. This >>> has a major impact on IPv6 neighbor discovery. Mobility management >>> is also vulnerable to disconnections that occur before the completion >>> of identify verification and tunnel management. This is especially >>> true given the unreliable nature of wireless communications. >>> Finally, >>> and perhaps most importantly, proper authorization for vehicular >>> protocol >>> messages must be assured in order to prevent false reports of >>> accidents >>> or other mishaps on the road, which would cause horrific misery in >>> modern urban environments. >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Although geographic routing is mentioned early in the document, it is >>> not discussed in later sections. This makes me wonder whether the early >>> mention is really relevant. In fact, for fast moving objects, I think >>> it is already questionable whether geographic routing has value. For >>> the RSUs, it is a lot easier to imagine a good use for geographic >>> routing, or perhaps some other use of geographic information to >>> establish links between application endpoints. If geographic algorithms >>> are mentioned at all, a lot more development is needed to establish >>> relevance to the problem statement. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> >>> More description is needed for OCB in the Terminology section. It would >>> also be a good idea to include definitions for "context-aware" and for >>> platooning. >>> >>> class-based safety plan needs a definition and a list of classes. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> >>> As a general comment, it seems to me that a proposed architecture is >>> usually considered to be part of the solution, not the problem >>> statement. In the case of this document, the architecture is really a >>> depiction of IPv6 as it might be normally considered to live in a >>> multi-network deployment (e.g., between a lot of cars and RSUs). But >>> anyway some care has to be taken so that the proposed architecture >>> doesn't otherwise place strong limits on acceptable solutions. So, for >>> example, in section 4.1, it needs to be clear whether or not a single >>> subnet prefix can span multiple vehicles. This is an important choice. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> >>> In section 5.1.1., a claim is made that a new link model is required. I >>> think this is a very ambitious claim, and I am not even quite sure what >>> is meant. IPv6 already provides for "on-link" and "off-link" variations >>> on subnet operation. Unless I am missing something here, the claim >>> should be made much more clear (or else retracted). >>> >>> Similarly, the suggestion that VANETs need to be merging and >>> partitioning as part of the problem statement seems at least ambitious >>> and might present a very high bar that could disqualify otherwise >>> suitable solutions. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> >>> It would be nice to have a citation about why current implementations of >>> address pseudonyms are insufficient for the purposes described in >>> section 5.1.2. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> >>> It seems to me that the discussion in section 5.1.3 lives almost >>> entirely in solution space. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------- >>> >>> In section 5.1.4, it was not clear to me about why Neighbor Discovery >>> really needs to be extended into being a routing protocol. >>> >>> -------------------------------------------- >>> >>> It seems to me that section 5.3 really belongs in section 6. Also, even >>> a perfectly authorized and legitimate vehicle might be persuaded somehow >>> to run malicious applications. I think that this point is not >>> sufficiently covered in the current text. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Charlie P. >>> Blue Sky Networks >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> its mailing list >>> its@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its >>> >> >> >> -- >> =========================== >> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D. >> Associate Professor >> Department of Software >> Sungkyunkwan University >> Office: +82-31-299-4957 >> Email: jaehoon.paul@gmail.com, pauljeong@skku.edu >> Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php >> <http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php> >> >> >> -- >> =========================== >> Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D. >> Associate Professor >> Department of Software >> Sungkyunkwan University >> Office: +82-31-299-4957 >> Email: jaehoon.paul@gmail.com, pauljeong@skku.edu >> Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php >> <http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php> >> > > > -- > Special Issue "Beyond 5G Evolution": > https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics/special_issues/beyond_5g > > -- =========================== Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Software Sungkyunkwan University Office: +82-31-299-4957 Email: jaehoon.paul@gmail.com, pauljeong@skku.edu Personal Homepage: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php <http://cpslab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php>
- [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-ipwa… Charlie Perkins
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… CARLOS JESUS BERNARDOS CANO
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong
- Re: [ipwave] Some review comments for draft-ietf-… Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong