IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments
charter-ietf-ipwave-01
Yes
(Suresh Krishnan)
No Objection
(Alexey Melnikov)
(Alia Atlas)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Terry Manderson)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00-01 and is now closed.
Ballot question: "Is this charter ready for external review?"
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
(was Block)
Yes
Yes
(2016-09-29 for -00-02)
Unknown
Updated text is much improved, thanks.
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
(was Block)
Yes
Yes
(2016-09-29 for -00-02)
Unknown
Thanks for the updated version. I think this one is better.
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
(was Block)
Yes
Yes
(2016-09-29 for -00-02)
Unknown
Thanks for the significant rework resulting in 00-02. I'm happy to ballot Yes on the result. The following might not have been clear in my previous BLOCK on 00-01, so let me try again :-) As the responsible AD for DTN, I am very interested in any thoughts the IPWAVE community has about the suitability of DTN's chartered work in the IPWAVE space, and welcome that conversation. My concern in my previous BLOCK was that the IPWAVE community might have already looked at DTN's chartered work and found it unsuited for deployments that will be based on IPWAVE. If that's happened, I'd love to hear more. If it hasn't happened, my apologies for misunderstanding.
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(2016-09-28 for -00-01)
Unknown
I think the charter ought also recognise the privacy sensitivity of potentially tracking people and their vehicles. So I'd suggest adding something like: "The WG will pay particular attention to the privacy characteristics of protocols it develops (or re-uses) in order to as far as possible ensure that IP in vehicles does not offer unwanted tracking opportunities."
Suresh Krishnan Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -00-01)
Unknown
Alexey Melnikov Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Unknown
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Unknown
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
(was Block)
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-02)
Unknown
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-27 for -00-01)
Unknown
To forward the feedback I sent previously: "Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) and Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I, not to be mistaken with V2Internet) communications are still being developed." I read the charter multiple times, and I'm still not sure what the infrastructure is in V2I. A sentence or two with background would be useful. "Other SDOs interested in this work include ISO/TC204, ETSI TC ITS, 3GPP, and NHTSA." Sure, it's interesting to know but what is the message for the ipwave group? Liaison, coordination, something else?
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-28 for -00-01)
Unknown
Supportive of the work though as others mentioned, the description is quite vague. Agree with Alvaro, prefer future work not to be mentioned at this time as seems more appropriate for routing. The first paragraph was difficult to parse as appropriate for a charter (too commercial), the second paragraph seems to be a better start. From the first paragraph, "safety applications using bidirectional data flows" seems to fit better with the later text on safety-related messages to describe what is needed.
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-28 for -00-01)
Unknown
I'm very supportive of this work, but do also agree with Mirja et al on vagueness of the group's work and scope.
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-27 for -00-01)
Unknown
I agree with Benoit and Mirja, I had to read the charter a few times to get an idea of what this group might work on, but the milestones seem like high-level goals, so I think that is okay. From the text, the development of a protocol is not clear to me and I think it's because of the following two sentences: However, IPv6 on 802.11-OCB is not yet defined. The group will work only on IPv6 solutions. Then, you see that development of a draft for IPv6 on 802.11-OCB is a milestone. Could this be made more clear in the charter text?
Mirja Kühlewind Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2016-09-19 for -00-01)
Unknown
To be honest, to me it's more clear from the charter what the wg will not do than what the will do, however that's okay. One question though: the charter says "This group will develop IP-based protocols...". Is it right to use the plural here? Will they work on multipe protocols or just one?
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(for -00-01)
Unknown