IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem Statement and Use Cases
draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-08
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 9365.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Jaehoon Paul Jeong | ||
| Last updated | 2019-03-24 (Latest revision 2018-11-04) | ||
| Replaces | draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey, draft-ietf-ipwave-problem-statement | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
INTDIR Telechat review
(of
-27)
by Pascal Thubert
Ready w/issues
ARTART Telechat review
(of
-27)
by Jim Fenton
Almost ready
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 9365 (Informational) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-08
IPWAVE Working Group J. Jeong, Ed.
Internet-Draft Sungkyunkwan University
Intended status: Informational March 24, 2019
Expires: September 25, 2019
IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem Statement
and Use Cases
draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-08
Abstract
This document discusses the problem statement and use cases of IP-
based vehicular networking for Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS). The main scenarios of vehicular communications are vehicle-
to-vehicle (V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), and vehicle-to-
everything (V2X) communications. First, this document surveys use
cases using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking. Second, it analyzes
proposed protocols for IP-based vehicular networking and highlights
the limitations and difficulties found on those protocols. Third, it
presents a problem exploration for key aspects in IP-based vehicular
networking, such as IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management, and
Security & Privacy. For each key aspect, this document discusses a
problem statement to evaluate the gap between the state-of-the-art
techniques and requirements in IP-based vehicular networking.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 25, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. V2V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. V2I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3. V2X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Analysis for Existing Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Existing Protocols for Vehicular Networking . . . . . . . 8
4.1.1. IP Address Autoconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.2. Routing Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.3. Mobility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1.4. DNS Naming Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.1.5. Service Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1.6. Security and Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.2. General Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.2.1. Vehicular Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2.2. Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.2.3. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.2.4. Pseudonym Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5. Problem Exploration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.1. Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.1.1. Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.1.2. MAC Address Pseudonym . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.1.3. Prefix Dissemination/Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.1.4. Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2. Mobility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.3. Security and Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Appendix A. Relevant Topics to IPWAVE Working Group . . . . . . 33
A.1. Vehicle Identity Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
A.2. Multihop V2X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
A.3. Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
A.4. DNS Naming Services and Service Discovery . . . . . . . . 34
A.5. IPv6 over Cellular Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
A.5.1. Cellular V2X (C-V2X) Using 4G-LTE . . . . . . . . . . 34
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
A.5.2. Cellular V2X (C-V2X) Using 5G . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Appendix B. Changes from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-
networking-07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Appendix C. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Appendix D. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
1. Introduction
Vehicular networking studies have mainly focused on improving safety
and efficiency, and also enabling entertainment in vehicular
networks. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the US
allocated wireless channels for Dedicated Short-Range Communications
(DSRC) [DSRC], service in the Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS) Radio Service in the 5.850 - 5.925 GHz band (5.9 GHz band).
DSRC-based wireless communications can support vehicle-to-vehicle
(V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), and vehicle-to-everything
(V2X) networking. Also, the European Union (EU) passed a decision to
allocate radio spectrum for safety-related and non-safety-related
applications of ITS with the frequency band of 5.875 - 5.905 GHz,
which is called Commission Decision 2008/671/EC [EU-2008-671-EC].
For direct inter-vehicular wireless connectivity, IEEE has amended
WiFi standard 802.11 to enable driving safety services based on the
DSRC in terms of standards for the Wireless Access in Vehicular
Environments (WAVE) system. The Physical Layer (L1) and Data Link
Layer (L2) issues are addressed in IEEE 802.11p [IEEE-802.11p] for
the PHY and MAC of the DSRC, while IEEE 1609.2 [WAVE-1609.2] covers
security aspects, IEEE 1609.3 [WAVE-1609.3] defines related services
at network and transport layers, and IEEE 1609.4 [WAVE-1609.4]
specifies the multi-channel operation. Note that IEEE 802.11p was a
separate standard, but was later enrolled into the base 802.11
standard (IEEE 802.11-2012) as IEEE 802.11 Outside the Context of a
Basic Service Set in 2012 [IEEE-802.11-OCB].
Along with these WAVE standards, IPv6 [RFC8200] and Mobile IP
protocols (e.g., MIPv4 [RFC5944], MIPv6 [RFC6275], and Proxy MIPv6
(PMIPv6) [RFC5213][RFC5844]) can be applied (or easily modified) to
vehicular networks. In Europe, ETSI has standardized a GeoNetworking
(GN) protocol [ETSI-GeoNetworking] and a protocol adaptation sub-
layer from GeoNetworking to IPv6 [ETSI-GeoNetwork-IP]. Note that a
GN protocol is useful to route an event or notification message to
vehicles around a geographic position, such as an acciendent area in
a roadway. In addition, ISO has approved a standard specifying the
IPv6 network protocols and services to be used for Communications
Access for Land Mobiles (CALM) [ISO-ITS-IPv6].
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
This document discusses problem statements and use cases related to
IP-based vehicular networking for Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS), which is denoted as IP Wireless Access in Vehicular
Environments (IPWAVE). First, it surveys the use cases for using
V2V, V2I, and V2X networking in the ITS. Second, for literature
review, it analyzes proposed protocols for IP-based vehicular
networking and highlights the limitations and difficulties found on
those protocols. Third, for problem statement, it presents a problem
exploration with key aspects in IPWAVE, such as IPv6 Neighbor
Discovery, Mobility Management, and Security & Privacy. For each key
aspect of the problem statement, it analyzes the gap between the
state-of-the-art techniques and the requirements in IP-based
vehicular networking. It also discusses potential topics relevant to
IPWAVE Working Group (WG), such as Vehicle Identities Management,
Multihop V2X Communications, Multicast, DNS Naming Services, Service
Discovery, and IPv6 over Cellular Networks. Therefore, with the
problem statement, this document will open a door to develop key
protocols for IPWAVE that will be essential to IP-based vehicular
networks.
2. Terminology
This document uses the following definitions:
o DMM: Acronym for "Distributed Mobility Management"
[RFC7333][RFC7429].
o LiDAR: Acronym for "Light Detection and Ranging". It is a
scanning device to measure a distance to an object by emitting
pulsed laser light and measuring the reflected pulsed light.
o Mobility Anchor (MA): A node that maintains IP addresses and
mobility information of vehicles in a road network to support
their address autoconfiguration and mobility management with a
binding table. It has end-to-end connections with RSUs under its
control.
o On-Board Unit (OBU): A node that has (e.g., IEEE 802.11-OCB and
Cellular V2X (C-V2X) [TS-23.285-3GPP]) for wireless communications
with other OBUs and RSUs, and may be connected to in-vehicle
devices or networks. An OBU is mounted on a vehicle. It is
assumed that a radio navigation receiver (e.g., Global Positioning
System (GPS)) is included in a vehicle with an OBU for efficient
navigation.
o OCB: Acronym for "Outside the Context of a Basic Service Set"
[IEEE-802.11-OCB].
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
o Road-Side Unit (RSU): A node that has physical communication
devices (e.g., IEEE 802.11-OCB and C-V2X) for wireless
communications with vehicles and is also connected to the Internet
as a router or switch for packet forwarding. An RSU is typically
deployed on the road infrastructure, either at an intersection or
in a road segment, but may also be located in car parking area.
o Traffic Control Center (TCC): A node that maintains road
infrastructure information (e.g., RSUs, traffic signals, and loop
detectors), vehicular traffic statistics (e.g., average vehicle
speed and vehicle inter-arrival time per road segment), and
vehicle information (e.g., a vehicle's identifier, position,
direction, speed, and trajectory as a navigation path). TCC is
included in a vehicular cloud for vehicular networks.
o Vehicular Cloud: A cloud infrastructure for vehicular networks,
having compute nodes, storage nodes, and network nodes.
o Vehicle Detection Loop (or Loop Detector): An inductive device
used for detecting vehicles passing or arriving at a certain
point, for instance approaching a traffic light or in motorway
traffic. The relatively crude nature of the loop's structure
means that only metal masses above a certain size are capable of
triggering the detection.
o V2I2P: Acronym for "Vehicle to Infrastructure to Pedestrian".
o V2I2V: Acronym for "Vehicle to Infrastructure to Vehicle".
o WAVE: Acronym for "Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments"
[WAVE-1609.0].
3. Use Cases
This section provides use cases of V2V, V2I, and V2X networking. The
use cases of the V2X networking exclude the ones of the V2V and V2I
networking, but include Vehicle-to-Pedestrian (V2P) and Vehicle-to-
Device (V2D).
3.1. V2V
The use cases of V2V networking discussed in this section include
o Context-aware navigation for driving safety and collision
avoidance;
o Cooperative adaptive cruise control in an urban roadway;
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
o Platooning in a highway;
o Cooperative environment sensing.
These four techniques will be important elements for self-driving
vehicles.
Context-Aware Safety Driving (CASD) navigator [CASD] can help drivers
to drive safely by letting the drivers recognize dangerous obstacles
and situations. That is, CASD navigator displays obstables or
neighboring vehicles relevant to possible collisions in real-time
through V2V networking. CASD provides vehicles with a class-based
automatic safety action plan, which considers three situations, such
as the Line-of-Sight unsafe, Non-Line-of-Sight unsafe and safe
situations. This action plan can be performed among vehicles through
V2V networking.
Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC) [CA-Cruise-Control] helps
vehicles to adapt their speed autonomously through V2V communication
among vehicles according to the mobility of their predecessor and
successor vehicles in an urban roadway or a highway. Thus, CACC can
help adjacent vehicles to efficiently adjust their speed in an
interactive way through V2V networking in order to avoid collision.
Platooning [Truck-Platooning] allows a series of vehicles (e.g.,
trucks) to move together with a very short inter-distance. Trucks
can use V2V communication in addition to forward sensors in order to
maintain constant clearance between two consecutive vehicles at very
short gaps (from 3 meters to 10 meters). This platooning can
maximize the throughput of vehicular traffic in a highway and reduce
the gas consumption because the leading vehicle can help the
following vehicles to experience less air resistance.
Cooperative-environment-sensing use cases suggest that vehicles can
share environmental information from various vehicle-mounted sensors,
such as radars, LiDARs and cameras with other vehicles and
pedestrians. [Automotive-Sensing] introduces a millimeter-wave
vehicular communication for massive automotive sensing. Data
generated by those sensors can be substantially large, and these data
shall be routed to different destinations. In addition, from the
perspective of driverless vehicles, it is expected that driverless
vehicles can be mixed with driver-operated vehicles. Through
cooperative environment sensing, driver-operated vehicles can use
environmental information sensed by driverless vehicles for better
interaction with the context.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
3.2. V2I
The use cases of V2I networking discussed in this section include
o Navigation service;
o Energy-efficient speed recommendation service;
o Accident notification service.
A navigation service, such as the Self-Adaptive Interactive
Navigation Tool (called SAINT) [SAINT], using V2I networking
interacts with TCC for the large-scale/long-range road traffic
optimization and can guide individual vehicles for appropriate
navigation paths in real time. The enhanced version of SAINT
[SAINTplus] can give the fast moving paths to emergency vehicles
(e.g., ambulance and fire engine) to let them reach accident spots
while providing other vehicles with efficient detour paths.
A TCC can recommend an energy-efficient speed to a vehicle driving in
different traffic environments. [Fuel-Efficient] studies fuel-
efficient route and speed plans for platooned trucks.
The emergency communication between accident vehicles (or emergency
vehicles) and TCC can be performed via either RSU or 4G-LTE networks.
The First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet) [FirstNet] is
provided by the US government to establish, operate, and maintain an
interoperable public safety broadband network for safety and security
network services, such as emergency calls. The construction of the
nationwide FirstNet network requires each state in the US to have a
Radio Access Network (RAN) that will connect to FirstNet's network
core. The current RAN is mainly constructed by 4G-LTE for the
communication between a vehicle and an infrastructure node (i.e.,
V2I) [FirstNet-Report], but it is expected that DSRC-based vehicular
networks [DSRC] will be available for V2I and V2V in near future.
3.3. V2X
The use case of V2X networking discussed in this section is
pedestrian protection service.
A pedestrian protection service, such as Safety-Aware Navigation
Application (called SANA) [SANA], using V2I2P networking can reduce
the collision of a vehicle and a pedestrian carrying a smartphone
equipped with the access technology with an RSU (e.g., WiFi).
Vehicles and pedestrians can also communicate with each other via an
RSU that delivers scheduling information for wireless communication
in order to save the smartphones' battery through sleeping mode.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
For Vehicle-to-Pedestrian (V2P), a vehicle and a pedestrian's
smartphone can directly communicate with each other via V2X without
the relaying of an RSU as in a V2V scenario such that the
pedestrian's smartphone is regarded as a vehicle with a wireless
media interface to be able to communicate with another vehicle. In
Vehicle-to-Device (V2D), a device can be a mobile node such as
bicycle and motorcycle, and can communicate directly with a vehicle
for collision avoidance.
4. Analysis for Existing Protocols
4.1. Existing Protocols for Vehicular Networking
We describe some currently existing protocols and proposed solutions
with respect to the following aspects that are relevant and essential
for vehicular networking:
o IP address autoconfiguration;
o Routing protocol;
o Mobility management;
o DNS naming service;
o Service discovery;
o Security and privacy.
4.1.1. IP Address Autoconfiguration
For IP address autoconfiguration, Fazio et al. proposed a vehicular
address configuration (VAC) scheme using DHCP where elected leader-
vehicles provide unique identifiers for IP address configurations in
vehicles [Address-Autoconf]. Kato et al. proposed an IPv6 address
assignment scheme using lane and position information
[Address-Assignment]. Baldessari et al. proposed an IPv6 scalable
address autoconfiguration scheme called GeoSAC for vehicular networks
[GeoSAC]. Wetterwald et al. conducted for heterogeneous vehicular
networks (i.e., employing multiple access technologies) a
comprehensive study of the cross-layer identity management, which
constitutes a fundamental element of the ITS architecture
[Identity-Management].
A server-based address autoconfiguration such as VAC
[Address-Autoconf] takes some delay for a vehicle to join a new
cluster (i.e., a connected VANET) and communicate with neighboring
vehicles. This delay may prevent vehicles from exchaning safety
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
messages with each other in a prompty way. It will be good for a
vehicle to maintain its IP address even when it joins another
cluster. A geographical-position-based address autoconfiguration,
such as a prefix allocation per lane [Address-Assignment] and a
prefix allocation per geographic region [GeoSAC], causes the frequent
change of a vehicle's IP address and requires the DAD for the
uniqueness test of a new IP address. This is significant overhead
for high-speed moving vehicles. It will be efficient for a vehicle
to be able to use its IP address while moving across the clusters and
geographical regions. For the cross-layer identity management with
multiple wireless interfaces [Identity-Management], it will be
necessary to maintain an upper-layer session (e.g., TCP session) of a
vehicle with multiple IP addresses corresponing to the multiple
wireless interfaces.
4.1.2. Routing Protocol
For vehicular routing, Abboud et al. proposed a cluster-based routing
[Cluster-Based-Routing]. Vehicles construct clusters along with
their location and speed information for fast data dissemination
among the clusters. They consist of cluster headers, cluster
gateways and cluster members for intra-cluster and inter-cluster
communications. Tsukada et al. presented a work that aims at
combining IPv6 networking and a Car-to-Car Network (called C2CNet)
routing protocol proposed by the Car-to-Car Communication Consortium
(C2C-CC). Note that C2CNet is the network layer of the C2C-CC
communication system and uses a geographic routing protocol for
vehicular networks [VANET-Geo-Routing]. Abrougui et al. presented a
gateway discovery scheme for vehicles to access the Internet via a
gateway, called Location-Aided Gateway Advertisement and Discovery
(LAGAD) mechanism [LAGAD]. A vehicle (as a packet source) multihop
away from a gateway can discover the gateway and deliver its packets
to the gateway through the packet forwarding of intermediate vehicles
(as relay vehicles) in a connected VANET. Those intermediate
vehicles are located between the packet source vehicle and the
gateway.
For data packet routing in vehicular networks, multihop V2V and
multihop V2I communications are required. For multihop V2V
communications within a connected VANET, a cluster-based routing like
[Cluster-Based-Routing] can play a role of efficient data forwarding
through a virtual backbone of cluster headers and cluster gateways.
For this, an efficient cluster formation is performed through sharing
the mobility information (e.g., position, direction, and speed) of
vehicles. But the pure VANET-based clustering will cause significant
control messages and need some delay for cluster formation, so
vehicles can perform clustering through infrastructure nodes (e.g.,
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
RSUs and base stations) via cellular links, which guarantees always-
network-connection.
For multihop V2I communications, a gateway discovery scheme like
LAGAD [LAGAD] can be used through a connected VANET having a
connection with an Internet gateway. However, this reactive gateway
discovery causes much control messages for the discovery and need
some delay until a packet source vehicle can transmit its packets
toward the gateway. Thus, a proactive gateway discovery is required
over a connected VANET where vehicles share routes towards gateways
(e.g., distance vector information to gateways) in a proactive
manner.
4.1.3. Mobility Management
For mobility management, Chen et al. tackled the issue of network
fragmentation in VANET environments [IP-Passing-Protocol] by
proposing a protocol that can postpone the time to release IP
addresses to the DHCP server and select a faster way to get the
vehicle's new IP address, when the vehicle density is low or the
speeds of vehicles are highly variable. Nguyen et al. proposed a
hybrid centralized-distributed mobility management called H-DMM to
support the mobility of high-speed mobile vehicles, which is based on
both DMM and PMIPv6 [H-DMM]. They also proposed a hybrid
centralized-distributed mobility management for network mobility
called H-NEMO to support the efficient mobility of mobile nodes and
mobile routers between different subnets, which is based on both DMM
and PMIPv6 [H-NEMO].
[NEMO-LMS] proposed an architecture to enable IP mobility for moving
networks using a network-based mobility scheme based on PMIPv6. Chen
et al. proposed a network mobility protocol to reduce handoff delay
and maintain Internet connectivity to moving vehicles in a highway
[NEMO-VANET]. Lee et al. proposed P-NEMO, which is a PMIPv6-based IP
mobility management scheme to maintain the Internet connectivity at
the vehicle as a mobile network, and provides a make-before-break
mechanism when vehicles switch to a new access network
[PMIP-NEMO-Analysis]. Peng et al. proposed a novel mobility
management scheme for integration of VANET and fixed IP networks
[VNET-MM]. This scheme uses both a road network layout and the
wireless coverage of multiple base stations in order to improve the
connectivity of vehicles to the Internet and decrease the overhead of
mobility management. Nguyen et al. extended their previous works
(i.e., H-DMM [H-DMM] and H-NEMO [H-NEMO]) on a vehicular DMM by using
a Software-Defined Networking (SDN) architecture, which separates the
control plane and the data plane in network functionality [SDN-DMM].
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
A vehicle can have an internal network for its in-vehicle devices and
passengers' mobile devices. In this case, vehicular networks need to
support not only the host mobility for the vehicle, but also the
network mobility of such an internet network within the vehicle. The
current mobility management schemes, such as [H-DMM] and [H-NEMO],
are not enough to support both the host mobility and network mobility
in an efficient way. An efficient mobility management scheme can
take advantage of a vehicle's mobility information (e.g., position,
direction, and speed) and partial or full trajectory (i.e., a
navigation path in a road network) in order to perform operations for
mobility management proactively. For this proactive mobility
management, an SDN-based mobility management scheme like [SDN-DMM]
will be promising because SDN controllers can proactively set up
forwarding tables for traffic flows of vehicles with their mobility
and trajectory information.
4.1.4. DNS Naming Service
For DNS naming service, Multicast DNS (mDNS) [RFC6762] allows devices
in one-hop communication range to resolve each other's DNS name into
the corresponding IP address in multicast. DNS Name
Autoconfiguration (DNSNA) [ID-DNSNA] proposes a DNS naming service
for Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices in a large-scale network.
A DNS name resolution service needs to support DNS name resolution
for in-vehicle devices and passengers' mobile devices within a
vehicle's internal network, which can be called intra-vehicle DNS
name resolution. Also, it needs to support DNS name resolution
between devices (e.g., cooperative cruise control device) existing in
different vehicles, which can be called inter-vehicle DNS name
resolution. In addition, it need to support DNS name resolution in
hosts or servers as corresponding nodes in the Internet, which can be
called global DNS name resolution.
For the intra-vehicle DNS name resolution and inter-vehicle DNS name
resolution, both mDNS [RFC6762] and DNSNA [ID-DNSNA] can be used, but
they perform DNS name resolution in a reactive way. That is, when a
DNS query is given by a querier, it will be multicasted to devices
through mDNS or be unicasted to a dedicated DNS server through DNSNA,
respectively.
For the inter-vehicle DNS name resolution in fast-moving vehicles, a
proactive DNS resolution can be performed by the help of an RSU that
collects the DNS information of vehicles and disseminate it to
vehicles under its coverage.
For the global DNS name resolution, a vehicle can use an RSU's DNS
server (or a DNS server close to an RSU in the wired network) to
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
perform a DNS resolution for the sake of the vehicle's device during
its travel. When the DNS resolution is finished by the RSU's DNS
server, the DNS server can forward the DNS resolution result to the
vehicle through the current RSU providing the vehicle with the
Internet connectivity.
4.1.5. Service Discovery
To discover instances of a demanded service in vehicular networks,
DNS-based Service Discovery (DNS-SD) [RFC6763] with either DNSNA
[ID-DNSNA] or mDNS [RFC6762] provides vehicles with service discovery
by using standard DNS queries. Vehicular ND [ID-Vehicular-ND]
proposes an extension of IPv6 ND for the prefix and service discovery
with new ND options.
For vehicular networks, DNSNA can use a dedicated DNS server residing
in an RSU or close to an RSU in the wired network [ID-DNSNA]. In
this case, in-vehicle devices can register their services (e.g.,
cooperative cruise control service and navigation service) into the
DNS server. When the DNS server can receive a service discovery
query from vehicles via an RSU, it can resolve it quickly for them.
In DNSNA, these DNS query and response messages are delivered in
unicast rather than multicast, so the wireless channel will be
utilized efficiently for DNS resolution including service discovery.
Thus, DNSNA will provide a more efficient service discovery to
vehicles in a high-vehicle-density environment than mDNS [RFC6762]
and Vehicular ND [ID-Vehicular-ND]. This is because a DNS query for
service discovery is unicasted by DNSNA, but it is multicasted by
both mDNS and Vehicular ND.
In a V2V scenario such as the case where a dedicated DNS server in an
RSU is not available for the registration and sharing of service
information, Vehicular ND can provide vehicles with rapid service
discovery by letting vehicles proactively advertise their service
information with Neighbor Advertisement (NA) messages. Thus,
considering both V2I and V2V scenarios, an efficient service
discovery scheme can be designed.
4.1.6. Security and Privacy
For security and privacy, Fernandez et al. proposed a secure
vehicular IPv6 communication scheme using Internet Key Exchange
version 2 (IKEv2) and Internet Protocol Security (IPsec) for
vehiculer networks. This scheme provides the secure communication
channel between a home agent and a mobile router to support the
network mobility of a vehicle's internal network [Securing-VCOMM].
Moustafa et al. proposed a security scheme providing authentication,
authorization, and accounting (AAA) services in vehicular networks
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[VNET-AAA]. The vehicular networks consist of VANETs as a front end
and an access network as a back end via an access point. The
security scheme provides vehicles with an efficient AAA service for
the network connectivity during their movement in the road network.
Security services in vehicular networks need to support an efficient
AAA for the accommodation of only valid vehicles and a secure
communication with IKEv2 and IPsec between vehicles or between a
vehicle and the corresponding node in the Internet. For the
efficiency, these security services need to take advantage of a
vehicular network architecture having a TCC and RSUs as well as a
vehicle's mobility and trajectory information.
4.2. General Problems
This section describes a possible vehicular network architecture for
V2V, V2I, and V2X communications. Then it analyzes the limitations
of the current protocols for vehicular networking.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
Traffic Control Center in Vehicular Cloud
*-----------------------------------------*
* *
* +----------------+ *
* | Mobility Anchor| *
* +----------------+ *
* ^ *
* | *
*--------------------v--------------------*
^ ^ ^
| | |
| | |
v v v
+--------+ Ethernet +--------+ +--------+
| RSU1 |<-------->| RSU2 |<---------->| RSU3 |
+--------+ +--------+ +--------+
^ ^ ^
: : :
+--------------------------------------+ +------------------+
| : V2I V2I : | | V2I : |
| v v | | v |
+--------+ | +--------+ +--------+ | | +--------+ |
|Vehicle1|===> |Vehicle2|===> |Vehicle3|===> | | |Vehicle4|===>|
| |<...>| |<........>| | | | | | |
+--------+ V2V +--------+ V2V +--------+ | | +--------+ |
| | | |
+--------------------------------------+ +------------------+
Subnet1 Subnet2
<----> Wired Link <....> Wireless Link ===> Moving Direction
Figure 1: A Vehicular Network Architecture for V2I and V2V Networking
4.2.1. Vehicular Network Architecture
Figure 1 shows an architecture for V2I and V2V networking in a road
network. As shown in this figure, RSUs as routers and vehicles with
OBU have wireless media interfaces for VANET. Also, it is assumed
that such the wireless media interfaces are autoconfigured with a
global IPv6 prefix (e.g., 2001:DB8:1:1::/64) to support both V2V and
V2I networking.
Especially, for IPv6 packets transporting over IEEE 802.11-OCB,
[IPv6-over-802.11-OCB] specifies several details, such as Maximum
Transmission Unit (MTU), frame format, link-local address, address
mapping for unicast and multicast, stateless autoconfiguration, and
subnet structure. Especially, an Ethernet Adaptation (EA) layer is
in charge of transforming some parameters between IEEE 802.11 MAC
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
layer and IPv6 network layer, which is located between IEEE
802.11-OCB's logical link control layer and IPv6 network layer. This
IPv6 over 802.11-OCB can be used for both V2V and V2I in IP-based
vehicular networks.
In Figure 1, three RSUs (RSU1, RSU2, and RSU3) are deployed in the
road network and are connected to a Vehicular Cloud through the
Internet. A Traffic Control Center (TCC) is connected to the
Vehicular Cloud for the management of RSUs and vehicles in the road
network. A Mobility Anchor (MA) is located in the TCC as its key
component for the mobility management of vehicles. Two vehicles
(Vehicle1 and Vehicle2) are wirelessly connected to RSU1, and one
vehicle (Vehicle3) is wirelessly connected to RSU2. The wireless
networks of RSU1 and RSU2 belong to a multi-link subnet (denoted as
Subnet1) with the same network prefix. Thus, these three vehicles
are within the same subnet. On the other hand, another vehicle
(Vehicle4) is wireless connected to RSU4, belonging to another subnet
(denoted as Subnet2). That is, the first three vehicles (i.e.,
Vehicle1, Vehicle2, and Vehicle3) and the last vehicle (i.e.,
Vehicle4) are located in the two different subnets.
In wireless subnets in vehicular networks (e.g., Subnet 1 and Subnet
2 in Figure 1), vehicles can construct a connected VANET (as an
arbitrary graph topology) and can communicate with each other via V2V
communication. Vehicle1 can communicate with Vehicle2 via V2V
communication, and Vehicle2 can communicate with Vehicle3 via V2V
communication because they are within the same subnet along their
IPv6 addresses, which are based on the same prefix. On the other
hand, Vehicle3 can communicate with Vehicle4 via RSU2 and RSU3
employing V2I (i.e., V2I2V) communication because they are within the
two different subnets along with their IPv6 addresses, which are
based on the two different prefixes.
In vehicular networks, unidirectional links exist and must be
considered for wireless communications. Also, in the vehicular
networks, control plane must be separated from data plane for
efficient mobility management and data forwarding using Software-
Defined Networking (SDN) [SDN-DMM]. The mobility information of a
GPS receiver mounted in its vehicle (e.g., trajectory, position,
speed, and direction) can be used for the accommodation of mobility-
aware proactive protocols. Vehicles can use the TCC as their Home
Network having a home agent for mobility management as in MIPv6
[RFC6275] and PMIPv6 [RFC5213], so the TCC maintains the mobility
information of vehicles for location management. Also, IP tunneling
over the wireless link should be avoided for performance efficiency.
Cespedes et al. proposed a vehicular IP in WAVE called VIP-WAVE for
I2V and V2I networking [VIP-WAVE]. The standard WAVE does not
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
support both seamless communications for Internet services and multi-
hop communications between a vehicle and an infrastructure node
(e.g., RSU), either. To overcome these limitations of the standard
WAVE, VIP-WAVE enhances the standard WAVE by the following three
schemes:
1. An efficient mechanism for the IPv6 address assignment and DAD
2. An on-demand IP mobility management based on PMIPv6 [RFC5213]
3. One-hop and two-hop communication scheme for V2I networking
Note that VIP-WAVE supports at most two-hop V2I communication for
simple forwarding operations in VANET. This is because the multi-hop
V2I communication with more than two hops requires an additional
VANET routing protocol. Such a multi-hop V2I communication will be
required for vehicles in a highway with sparsely deployed RSUs in
order to provide them with the Internet connectivity via V2I.
Baccelli et al. provided an analysis of the operation of IPv6 as it
has been described by the IEEE WAVE standards 1609 [IPv6-WAVE]. This
analysis confirms that the use of the standard IPv6 protocol stack in
WAVE is not sufficient. It recommends that the IPv6 addressing
assignment should follow considerations for ad-hoc link models,
defined in [RFC5889] for nodes' mobility and link variability.
However, this ad-hoc link model is not clearly defined to support the
efficient V2V and V2I for vehicles with a wireless interface
configured with an IPv6 address.
Petrescu et al. proposed the joint IP networking and radio
architecture for V2V and V2I communication in [Joint-IP-Networking].
The radio architecture uses Wi-Fi for wireless link rather than IEEE
802.11-OCB. The proposed architecture considers an IP topology in a
similar way as a radio link topology, in the sense that an IP subnet
would correspond to the range of 1-hop vehicular communication. This
architecture defines three types of vehicles: Leaf Vehicle, Range
Extending Vehicle, and Internet Vehicle. Leaf Vehicle is like a
vehicle with OBU and has one external WiFi interface along with an
MR. This MR supports the network mobility of a user's mobile device
and in-vehicle devices in the vehicle's internal network. Range
Extending Vehicles has two external Wi-Fi interfaces to connect two
Wi-Fi subnets of cars in a train. Internet Vehicle has one Wi-Fi
interface for a car's subnet and one Wireless Metropolitan Area
Network (WMAN) interface for the Internet connectivity. However,
this architecture is not suitable for vehicles with a small size and
with a wireless interface for V2V and V2I in vehicular links.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
4.2.1.1. V2I-based Internetworking
This section discusses the internetworking between a vehicle's moving
network and an RSU's fixed network via V2I communication.
+-----------------+
(*)<........>(*) +----->| Vehicular Cloud |
2001:DB8:1:1::/64 | | | +-----------------+
+------------------------------+ +---------------------------------+
| v | | v v |
| +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +------+ +-------+ |
| | Host1 | | DNS1 | |Router1| | | |Router3| | DNS2 | | Host3 | |
| +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +------+ +-------+ |
| ^ ^ ^ | | ^ ^ ^ |
| | | | | | | | | |
| v v v | | v v v |
| ---------------------------- | | ------------------------------- |
| 2001:DB8:10:1::/64 ^ | | ^ 2001:DB8:20:1::/64 |
| | | | | |
| v | | v |
| +-------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ |
| | Host2 | |Router2| | | |Router4| |Server1|...|ServerN| |
| +-------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ |
| ^ ^ | | ^ ^ ^ |
| | | | | | | | |
| v v | | v v v |
| ---------------------------- | | ------------------------------- |
| 2001:DB8:10:2::/64 | | 2001:DB8:20:2::/64 |
+------------------------------+ +---------------------------------+
Vehicle1 (Moving Network1) RSU1 (Fixed Network1)
<----> Wired Link <....> Wireless Link (*) Antenna
Figure 2: Internetworking between Vehicle Network and RSU Network
As shown in Figure 2, the vehicle's moving network and the RSU's
fixed network are self-contained networks having multiple subnets and
having an edge router for the communication with another vehicle or
RSU. Internetworking between two internal networks via V2I
communication requires an exchange of network prefix and other
parameters through a prefix discovery mechanism, such as ND-based
prefix discovery [ID-Vehicular-ND]. For the ND-based prefix
discovery, network prefixs and parameters should be registered into a
vehicle's router and an RSU router with an external network interface
in advance.
The network parameter discovery collects networking information for
an IP communication between a vehicle and an RSU or between two
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
neighboring vehicles, such as link layer, MAC layer, and IP layer
information. The link layer information includes wireless link layer
parameters, such as wireless media (e.g., IEEE 802.11-OCB and LTE-
V2X) and a transmission power level. The MAC layer information
includes the MAC address of an external network interface for the
internetworking with another vehicle or RSU. The IP layer
information includes the IP address and prefix of an external network
interface for the internetworking with another vehicle or RSU.
Once the network parameter discovery and prefix exchange operations
have been performed, packets can be transmitted between the vehicle's
moving network and the RSU's fixed network. DNS services should be
supported to enable name resolution for hosts or servers residing
either in the vehicle's moving network or the RSU's fixed network.
It is assumed that the DNS names of in-vehicle devices and their
service names are registered into a DNS server in a vehicle or an
RSU, as shown in Figure 2. For service discovery, those DNS names
and service names can be advertised to neighboring vehicles through
either DNS-based service discovery mechanisms
[RFC6762][RFC6763][ID-DNSNA] and ND-based service discovery
[ID-Vehicular-ND]. For the ND-based service discovery, service names
should be registered into a vehicle's router and an RSU router with
an external network interface in advance. For this service
discovery, each vehicle and each RSU should have its dedicated DNS
server within its internal network, respectively, as shown in
Figure 2.
Figure 2 shows internetworking between the vehicle's moving network
and the RSU's fixed network. There exists an internal network
(Moving Network1) inside Vehicle1. Vehicle1 has the DNS Server
(DNS1), the two hosts (Host1 and Host2), and the two routers (Router1
and Router2). There exists another internal network (Fixed Network1)
inside RSU1. RSU1 has the DNS Server (DNS2), one host (Host3), the
two routers (Router3 and Router4), and the collection of servers
(Server1 to ServerN) for various services in the road networks, such
as the emergency notification and navigation. Vehicle1's Router1
(called mobile router) and RSU1's Router3 (called fixed router) use
2001:DB8:1:1::/64 for an external link (e.g., DSRC) for I2V
networking.
4.2.1.2. V2V-based Internetworking
This section discusses the internetworking between the moving
networks of two neighboring vehicles via V2V communication.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
(*)<..........>(*)
2001:DB8:1:1::/64 | |
+------------------------------+ +------------------------------+
| v | | v |
| +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +------+ +-------+ |
| | Host1 | | DNS1 | |Router1| | | |Router5| | DNS3 | | Host4 | |
| +-------+ +------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +------+ +-------+ |
| ^ ^ ^ | | ^ ^ ^ |
| | | | | | | | | |
| v v v | | v v v |
| ---------------------------- | | ---------------------------- |
| 2001:DB8:10:1::/64 ^ | | ^ 2001:DB8:30:1::/64 |
| | | | | |
| v | | v |
| +-------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +-------+ |
| | Host2 | |Router2| | | |Router6| | Host5 | |
| +-------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +-------+ |
| ^ ^ | | ^ ^ |
| | | | | | | |
| v v | | v v |
| ---------------------------- | | ---------------------------- |
| 2001:DB8:10:2::/64 | | 2001:DB8:30:2::/64 |
+------------------------------+ +------------------------------+
Vehicle1 (Moving Network1) Vehicle2 (Moving Network2)
<----> Wired Link <....> Wireless Link (*) Antenna
Figure 3: Internetworking between Two Vehicle Networks
Figure 3 shows internetworking between the moving networks of two
neighboring vehicles. There exists an internal network (Moving
Network1) inside Vehicle1. Vehicle1 has the DNS Server (DNS1), the
two hosts (Host1 and Host2), and the two routers (Router1 and
Router2). There exists another internal network (Moving Network2)
inside Vehicle2. Vehicle2 has the DNS Server (DNS3), the two hosts
(Host4 and Host5), and the two routers (Router5 and Router6).
Vehicle1's Router1 (called mobile router) and Vehicle2's Router5
(called mobile router) use 2001:DB8:1:1::/64 for an external link
(e.g., DSRC) for V2V networking.
4.2.2. Latency
The communication delay (i.e., latency) between two vehicles should
be bounded to a certain threshold (e.g., 500 ms) for collision-
avoidance message exchange [CASD]. For IP-based safety applications
(e.g., context-aware navigation, adaptive cruise control, and
platooning) in vehicular network, this bounded data delivery is
critical. The real implementations for such applications are not
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
available yet. Thus, the feasibility of IP-based safety applications
is not tested yet in the real world.
4.2.3. Security
Strong security measures shall protect vehicles roaming in road
networks from the attacks of malicious nodes, which are controlled by
hackers. For safety applications, the cooperation among vehicles is
assumed. Malicious nodes may disseminate wrong driving information
(e.g., location, speed, and direction) to make driving be unsafe.
Sybil attack, which tries to illude a vehicle with multiple false
identities, disturbs a vehicle in taking a safe maneuver. This sybil
attack should be prevented through the cooperation between good
vehicles and RSUs. Applications on IP-based vehicular networking,
which are resilient to such a sybil attack, are not developed and
tested yet.
4.2.4. Pseudonym Handling
For the protection of drivers' privacy, the pseudonym of a MAC
address of a vehicle's network interface should be used, with the
help of which the MAC address can be changed periodically. The
pseudonym of a MAC address affects an IPv6 address based on the MAC
address, and a transport-layer (e.g., TCP) session with an IPv6
address pair. However, the pseudonym handling is not implemented and
tested yet for applications on IP-based vehicular networking.
5. Problem Exploration
This section discusses key topics for IPWAVE WG, such as neighbor
discovery, mobility management, and security & privacy.
5.1. Neighbor Discovery
Neighbor Discovery (ND) [RFC4861] is a core part of the IPv6 protocol
suite. This section discusses the need for modifying ND for use with
vehicular networking (e.g., V2V, V2I, and V2X). The vehicles are
moving fast within the communication coverage of a vehicular node
(e.g., vehicle and RSU). The external wireless link between two
vehicular nodes can be used for vehicular networking, as shown in
Figure 2 and Figure 3.
ND time-related parameters such as router lifetime and Neighbor
Advertisement (NA) interval should be adjusted for high-speed
vehicles and vehicle density. As vehicles move faster, the NA
interval should decrease (e.g., from 1 sec to 0.5 sec) for the NA
messages to reach the neighboring vehicles promptly. Also, as
vehicle density is higher, the NA interval should increase (e.g.,
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
from 0.5 sec to 1 sec) for the NA messages to reduce collision
probability with other NA messages.
5.1.1. Link Model
IPv6 protocols work under certain assumptions for the link model that
do not necessarily hold in a vehicular wireless link [VIP-WAVE]. For
instance, some IPv6 protocols assume symmetry in the connectivity
among neighboring interfaces. However, interference and different
levels of transmission power may cause unidirectional links to appear
in vehicular wireless links. As a result, a new vehicular link model
is required for a dynamically changing vehicular wireless link.
There is a relationship between a link and prefix, besides the
different scopes that are expected from the link-local and global
types of IPv6 addresses. In an IPv6 link, it is assumed that all
interfaces which are configured with the same subnet prefix and with
on-link bit set can communicate with each other on an IP link or
extended IP links via ND proxy. Note that a subnet prefix can be
used by spanning multiple links into a multi-link subnet with an
extended subnet concept [RFC6775]. Also, note that IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) can be performed in the multiple
links where each of them is not assigned with a unique subnet prefix,
that is, all of them are configured with the same subnet prefix
[RFC4861][RFC4862].
A vehicular link model needs to consider a multi-hop V2V (or V2I)
over a multi-link subnet as shown in Figure 1. In this figure,
vehicles in Subnet1 having RSU1 and RSU2 construct a multi-link
subnet called Subnet1 with VANETs and RSUs. Vehicle1 and Vehicle3
can communicate with each other via multi-hop V2V or multi-hop V2I2V.
When two vehicles (e.g., Vehicle1 and Vehicle3 in Figure 1) are
connected in a VANET, they can communicate with each other via VANET
rather than RSUs. On the other hand, when two vehicles (e.g.,
Vehicle1 and Vehicle3) are far away from the communication range in
separate VANETs and under two different RSUs, they can communicate
with each other through the relay of RSUs via V2I2V.
Thus, IPv6 ND should be extended into a Vehicular Neighbor Discovey
(VND) [ID-Vehicular-ND] to support the concept of an IPv6 link
corresponding to an IPv6 prefix even in a multi-link subnet
consisting of multiple vehicles and RSUs that are interconnected with
wireless communication range in IP-based vehicular networks.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
5.1.2. MAC Address Pseudonym
In the ETSI standards, for the sake of security and privacy, an ITS
station (e.g., vehicle) can use pseudonyms for its network interface
identities (e.g., MAC address) and the corresponding IPv6 addresses
[Identity-Management]. Whenever the network interface identifier
changes, the IPv6 address based on the network interface identifier
should be updated, and the uniqueness of the address should be
performed through the DAD procedure. For vehicular networks with
high-mobility, this DAD should be performed efficiently with minimum
overhead.
For the continuity of an end-to-end (E2E) transport-layer (e.g., TCP,
UDP, and SCTP) session, with a mobility management scheme (e.g.,
MIPv6 and PMIPv6), the new IP address for the transport-layer session
can be notified to an appropriate end point, and the packets of the
session should be forwarded to their destinations with the changed
network interface identifier and IPv6 address. This mobiliy
management overhead for pseudonyms should be minimized for efficient
operations in vehicular networks having lots of vehicles.
5.1.3. Prefix Dissemination/Exchange
A vehicle and an RSU can have their internal network, as shown in
Figure 2 and Figure 3. In this case, nodes in within the internal
networks of two vehicular nodes (e.g., vehicle and RSU) want to
communicate with each other. For this communication on the wireless
link, the network prefix dissemination or exchange is required. It
is assumed that a vehicular node has an external network interface
and its internal network, as shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3. The
vehicular ND (VND) [ID-Vehicular-ND] can support the communication
between the internal-network nodes (e.g., an in-vehicle device in a
vehicle and a server in an RSU) of vehicular nodes with a vehicular
prefix information option. Thus, this ND extension for routing
functionality can reduce control traffic for routing in vehicular
networks without a vehicular ad hoc routing protocol (e.g., AODV
[RFC3561] and OLSRv2 [RFC7181]).
5.1.4. Routing
For multihop V2V communications in a multi-link subnet (as a
connected VANET), a vehicular ad hoc routing protocol (e.g., AODV and
OLSRv2) may be required to support both unicast and multicast in the
links of the subnet with the same IPv6 prefix. Instead of the
vehicular ad hoc routing protocol, Vehicular ND along with a prefix
discovery option can be used to let vehicles exchange their prefixes
in a multihop fashion [ID-Vehicular-ND]. With the exchanged
prefixes, they can compute their routing table (or IPv6 ND's neighbor
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
cache) for the multi-link subnet with a distance-vector algorithm
[Intro-to-Algorithms].
Also, an efficient, rapid DAD should be supported in a multi-link
subnet to prevent or reduce IPv6 address conflicts in such a subnet
by using a multi-hop DAD optimization [ID-Vehicular-ND][RFC6775] or
an IPv6 geographic-routing-based address autoconfiguration [GeoSAC].
5.2. Mobility Management
The seamless connectivity and timely data exchange between two end
points requires an efficient mobility management including location
management and handover. Most of vehicles are equipped with a GPS
receiver as part of a dedicated navigation system or a corresponding
smartphone App. The GPS receiver may not provide vehicles with
accurate location information in adverse, local environments such as
building area and tunnel. The location precision can be improved by
the assistance from the RSUs or a cellular system with a navigation
system.
With this GPS navigator, an efficient mobility management is possible
by vehicles periodically reporting their current position and
trajectory (i.e., navigation path) to RSUs and a Mobility Anchor (MA)
in TCC. The RSUs and MA can predict the future positions of the
vehicles with their mobility information (i.e., the current position,
speed, direction, and trajectory) for the efficient mobility
management (e.g., proactive handover). For a better proactive
handover, link-layer parameters, such as the signal strength of a
link-layer frame (e.g., Received Channel Power Indicator (RCPI)
[VIP-WAVE]), can be used to determine the moment of a handover
between RSUs along with mobility information [ID-Vehicular-ND].
With the prediction of the vehicle mobility, MA can support RSUs to
perform DAD, data packet routing, horizontal handover (i.e., handover
in wireless links using a homogeneous radio technology), and vertical
handover (i.e., handover in wireless links using heterogeneous radio
technologies) in a proactive manner. Even though a vehicle moves
into the wireless link under another RSU belonging to a different
subnet, the RSU can proactively perform the DAD for the sake of the
vehicle, reducing IPv6 control traffic overhead in the wireless link
[ID-Vehicular-ND]. To prevent a hacker from impersonating RSUs as
bogus RSUs, RSUs and MA should have secure channels via IPsec.
Therefore, with a proactive handover and a multihop DAD in vehicular
networks [ID-Vehicular-ND], RSUs can efficiently forward data packets
from the wired network (or the wireless network) to a moving
destination vehicle along its trajectory along with the MA. Thus, a
moving vehicle can communicate with its corresponding vehicle in the
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
vehicular network or a host/server in the Internet along its
trajectory.
5.3. Security and Privacy
Security and privacy are paramount in the V2I, V2V, and V2X
networking in vehicular networks. Only authorized vehicles should be
allowed to use vehicular networking. Also, in-vehicle devices and
mobile devices in a vehicle need to communicate with other in-vehicle
devices and mobile devices in another vehicle, and other servers in
an RSU in a secure way.
A Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) and a user certificate along
with in-vehicle device's identifier generation can be used to
efficiently authenticate a vehicle or a user through a road
infrastructure node (e.g., RSU) connected to an authentication server
in TCC. Also, Transport Layer Security (TLS) certificates can be
used for secure E2E vehicle communications.
For secure V2I communication, a secure channel between a mobile
router in a vehicle and a fixed router in an RSU should be
established, as shown in Figure 2. Also, for secure V2V
communication, a secure channel between a mobile router in a vehicle
and a mobile router in another vehicle should be established, as
shown in Figure 3.
To prevent an adversary from tracking a vehicle with its MAC address
or IPv6 address, MAC address pseudonym should be provided to the
vehicle; that is, each vehicle should periodically update its MAC
address and the corresponding IPv6 address as suggested in
[RFC4086][RFC4941]. Such an update of the MAC and IPv6 addresses
should not interrupt the E2E communications between two vehicular
nodes (e.g., vehicle and RSU) in terms of transport layer for a long-
living higher-layer session. However, if this pseudonym is performed
without strong E2E confidentiality, there will be no privacy benefit
from changing MAC and IP addresses, because an adversary can see the
change of the MAC and IP addresses and track the vehicle with those
addresses.
6. Security Considerations
This document discussed security and privacy for IP-based vehicular
networking.
The security and privacy for key components in IP-based vehicular
networking, such as neighbor discovery and mobility management, need
to be analyzed in depth.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
7. Informative References
[Address-Assignment]
Kato, T., Kadowaki, K., Koita, T., and K. Sato, "Routing
and Address Assignment using Lane/Position Information in
a Vehicular Ad-hoc Network", IEEE Asia-Pacific Services
Computing Conference, December 2008.
[Address-Autoconf]
Fazio, M., Palazzi, C., Das, S., and M. Gerla, "Automatic
IP Address Configuration in VANETs", ACM International
Workshop on Vehicular Inter-Networking, September 2016.
[Automotive-Sensing]
Choi, J., Va, V., Gonzalez-Prelcic, N., Daniels, R., R.
Bhat, C., and R. W. Heath, "Millimeter-Wave Vehicular
Communication to Support Massive Automotive Sensing",
IEEE Communications Magazine, December 2016.
[Broadcast-Storm]
Wisitpongphan, N., K. Tonguz, O., S. Parikh, J., Mudalige,
P., Bai, F., and V. Sadekar, "Broadcast Storm Mitigation
Techniques in Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks", IEEE Wireless
Communications, December 2007.
[CA-Cruise-Control]
California Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology
(PATH), "Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control", [Online]
Available:
http://www.path.berkeley.edu/research/automated-and-
connected-vehicles/cooperative-adaptive-cruise-control,
2017.
[CASD] Shen, Y., Jeong, J., Oh, T., and S. Son, "CASD: A
Framework of Context-Awareness Safety Driving in Vehicular
Networks", International Workshop on Device Centric Cloud
(DC2), March 2016.
[Cluster-Based-Routing]
Abboud, K. and W. Zhuang, "Impact of Microscopic Vehicle
Mobility on Cluster-Based Routing Overhead in VANETs",
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, Vol. 64, No.
12, December 2015.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[DSRC] ASTM International, "Standard Specification for
Telecommunications and Information Exchange Between
Roadside and Vehicle Systems - 5 GHz Band Dedicated Short
Range Communications (DSRC) Medium Access Control (MAC)
and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications",
ASTM E2213-03(2010), October 2010.
[ETSI-GeoNetwork-IP]
ETSI Technical Committee Intelligent Transport Systems,
"Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); Vehicular
Communications; GeoNetworking; Part 6: Internet
Integration; Sub-part 1: Transmission of IPv6 Packets over
GeoNetworking Protocols", ETSI EN 302 636-6-1, October
2013.
[ETSI-GeoNetworking]
ETSI Technical Committee Intelligent Transport Systems,
"Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); Vehicular
Communications; GeoNetworking; Part 4: Geographical
addressing and forwarding for point-to-point and point-to-
multipoint communications; Sub-part 1: Media-Independent
Functionality", ETSI EN 302 636-4-1, May 2014.
[EU-2008-671-EC]
European Union, "Commission Decision of 5 August 2008 on
the Harmonised Use of Radio Spectrum in the 5875 - 5905
MHz Frequency Band for Safety-related Applications of
Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS)", EU 2008/671/EC,
August 2008.
[FirstNet]
U.S. National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA), "First Responder Network Authority
(FirstNet)", [Online]
Available: https://www.firstnet.gov/, 2012.
[FirstNet-Report]
First Responder Network Authority, "FY 2017: ANNUAL REPORT
TO CONGRESS, Advancing Public Safety Broadband
Communications", FirstNet FY 2017, December 2017.
[Fuel-Efficient]
van de Hoef, S., H. Johansson, K., and D. V. Dimarogonas,
"Fuel-Efficient En Route Formation of Truck Platoons",
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems,
January 2018.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[GeoSAC] Baldessari, R., Bernardos, C., and M. Calderon, "GeoSAC -
Scalable Address Autoconfiguration for VANET Using
Geographic Networking Concepts", IEEE International
Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio
Communications, September 2008.
[H-DMM] Nguyen, T. and C. Bonnet, "A Hybrid Centralized-
Distributed Mobility Management for Supporting Highly
Mobile Users", IEEE International Conference on
Communications, June 2015.
[H-NEMO] Nguyen, T. and C. Bonnet, "A Hybrid Centralized-
Distributed Mobility Management Architecture for Network
Mobility", IEEE International Symposium on A World of
Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks, June 2015.
[ID-DNSNA]
Jeong, J., Ed., Lee, S., and J. Park, "DNS Name
Autoconfiguration for Internet of Things Devices", draft-
jeong-ipwave-iot-dns-autoconf-04 (work in progress),
October 2018.
[ID-Vehicular-ND]
Jeong, J., Ed., Shen, Y., and Z. Xiang, "IPv6 Neighbor
Discovery for IP-Based Vehicular Networks", draft-jeong-
ipwave-vehicular-neighbor-discovery-06 (work in progress),
March 2019.
[Identity-Management]
Wetterwald, M., Hrizi, F., and P. Cataldi, "Cross-layer
Identities Management in ITS Stations", The 10th
International Conference on ITS Telecommunications,
November 2010.
[IEEE-802.11-OCB]
"Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and
Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications", IEEE Std
802.11-2016, December 2016.
[IEEE-802.11p]
"Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and
Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications - Amendment 6:
Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments", IEEE Std
802.11p-2010, June 2010.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[Intro-to-Algorithms]
H. Cormen, T., E. Leiserson, C., L. Rivest, R., and C.
Stein, "Introduction to Algorithms, 3rd ed.", The
MIT Press, July 2009.
[IP-Passing-Protocol]
Chen, Y., Hsu, C., and W. Yi, "An IP Passing Protocol for
Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks with Network Fragmentation",
Elsevier Computers & Mathematics with Applications,
January 2012.
[IPv6-over-802.11-OCB]
Petrescu, A., Benamar, N., Haerri, J., Lee, J., and T.
Ernst, "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.11
Networks operating in mode Outside the Context of a Basic
Service Set (IPv6-over-80211-OCB)", draft-ietf-ipwave-
ipv6-over-80211ocb-34 (work in progress), December 2018.
[IPv6-WAVE]
Baccelli, E., Clausen, T., and R. Wakikawa, "IPv6
Operation for WAVE - Wireless Access in Vehicular
Environments", IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference,
December 2010.
[ISO-ITS-IPv6]
ISO/TC 204, "Intelligent Transport Systems -
Communications Access for Land Mobiles (CALM) - IPv6
Networking", ISO 21210:2012, June 2012.
[Joint-IP-Networking]
Petrescu, A., Boc, M., and C. Ibars, "Joint IP Networking
and Radio Architecture for Vehicular Networks",
11th International Conference on ITS Telecommunications,
August 2011.
[LAGAD] Abrougui, K., Boukerche, A., and R. Pazzi, "Location-Aided
Gateway Advertisement and Discovery Protocol for VANets",
IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, Vol. 59, No. 8,
October 2010.
[Multicast-802]
Perkins, C., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and JC. Zuniga,
"Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless Media",
draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802-03 (work in
progress), July 2017.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[Multicast-Alert]
Camara, D., Bonnet, C., Nikaein, N., and M. Wetterwald,
"Multicast and Virtual Road Side Units for Multi
Technology Alert Messages Dissemination", IEEE 8th
International Conference on Mobile Ad-Hoc and Sensor
Systems, October 2011.
[NEMO-LMS]
Soto, I., Bernardos, C., Calderon, M., Banchs, A., and A.
Azcorra, "NEMO-Enabled Localized Mobility Support for
Internet Access in Automotive Scenarios",
IEEE Communications Magazine, May 2009.
[NEMO-VANET]
Chen, Y., Hsu, C., and C. Cheng, "Network Mobility
Protocol for Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks",
Wiley International Journal of Communication Systems,
November 2014.
[PMIP-NEMO-Analysis]
Lee, J., Ernst, T., and N. Chilamkurti, "Performance
Analysis of PMIPv6-Based Network Mobility for Intelligent
Transportation Systems", IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
Technology, January 2012.
[RFC3561] Perkins, C., Belding-Royer, E., and S. Das, "Ad hoc On-
Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing", RFC 3561, July
2003.
[RFC4086] Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker,
"Randomness Requirements for Security", RFC 4086, June
2005.
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
September 2007.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.
[RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in
IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007.
[RFC5213] Gundavelli, S., Ed., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V.,
Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6",
RFC 5213, August 2008.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[RFC5844] Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
Mobile IPv6", RFC 5844, May 2010.
[RFC5889] Baccelli, E. and M. Townsley, "IP Addressing Model in Ad
Hoc Networks", RFC 5889, September 2010.
[RFC5944] Perkins, C., Ed., "IP Mobility Support in IPv4, Revised",
RFC 5944, November 2010.
[RFC6275] Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility
Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.
[RFC6762] Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Multicast DNS", RFC 6762,
February 2013.
[RFC6763] Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
Discovery", RFC 6763, February 2013.
[RFC6775] Shelby, Z., Chakrabarti, S., Nordmark, E., and C. Bormann,
"Neighbor Discovery Optimization for IPv6 over Low-Power
Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)", RFC 6775,
November 2012.
[RFC7181] Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Jacquet, P., and U. Herberg,
"The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol Version 2",
RFC 7181, April 2014.
[RFC7333] Chan, H., Liu, D., Seite, P., Yokota, H., and J. Korhonen,
"Requirements for Distributed Mobility Management",
RFC 7333, August 2014.
[RFC7429] Liu, D., Zuniga, JC., Seite, P., Chan, H., and CJ.
Bernardos, "Distributed Mobility Management: Current
Practices and Gap Analysis", RFC 7429, January 2015.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 8200, July 2017.
[SAINT] Jeong, J., Jeong, H., Lee, E., Oh, T., and D. Du, "SAINT:
Self-Adaptive Interactive Navigation Tool for Cloud-Based
Vehicular Traffic Optimization", IEEE Transactions on
Vehicular Technology, Vol. 65, No. 6, June 2016.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[SAINTplus]
Shen, Y., Lee, J., Jeong, H., Jeong, J., Lee, E., and D.
Du, "SAINT+: Self-Adaptive Interactive Navigation Tool+
for Emergency Service Delivery Optimization",
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems,
June 2017.
[SANA] Hwang, T. and J. Jeong, "SANA: Safety-Aware Navigation
Application for Pedestrian Protection in Vehicular
Networks", Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science
(LNCS), Vol. 9502, December 2015.
[SDN-DMM] Nguyen, T., Bonnet, C., and J. Harri, "SDN-based
Distributed Mobility Management for 5G Networks",
IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference,
April 2016.
[Securing-VCOMM]
Fernandez, P., Santa, J., Bernal, F., and A. Skarmeta,
"Securing Vehicular IPv6 Communications",
IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing,
January 2016.
[TR-22.886-3GPP]
3GPP, "Study on Enhancement of 3GPP Support for 5G V2X
Services", 3GPP TS 22.886, June 2018.
[Truck-Platooning]
California Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology
(PATH), "Automated Truck Platooning", [Online] Available:
http://www.path.berkeley.edu/research/automated-and-
connected-vehicles/truck-platooning, 2017.
[TS-23.285-3GPP]
3GPP, "Architecture Enhancements for V2X Services", 3GPP
TS 23.285, June 2018.
[VANET-Geo-Routing]
Tsukada, M., Jemaa, I., Menouar, H., Zhang, W., Goleva,
M., and T. Ernst, "Experimental Evaluation for IPv6 over
VANET Geographic Routing", IEEE International Wireless
Communications and Mobile Computing Conference, June 2010.
[VIP-WAVE]
Cespedes, S., Lu, N., and X. Shen, "VIP-WAVE: On the
Feasibility of IP Communications in 802.11p Vehicular
Networks", IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation
Systems, vol. 14, no. 1, March 2013.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
[VMaSC-LTE]
Ucar, S., Ergen, S., and O. Ozkasap, "Multihop-Cluster-
Based IEEE 802.11p and LTE Hybrid Architecture for VANET
Safety Message Dissemination", IEEE Transactions on
Vehicular Technology, April 2016.
[VNET-AAA]
Moustafa, H., Bourdon, G., and Y. Gourhant, "Providing
Authentication and Access Control in Vehicular Network
Environment", IFIP TC-11 International Information
Security Conference, May 2006.
[VNET-MM] Peng, Y. and J. Chang, "A Novel Mobility Management Scheme
for Integration of Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks and Fixed IP
Networks", Springer Mobile Networks and Applications,
February 2010.
[WAVE-1609.0]
IEEE 1609 Working Group, "IEEE Guide for Wireless Access
in Vehicular Environments (WAVE) - Architecture", IEEE Std
1609.0-2013, March 2014.
[WAVE-1609.2]
IEEE 1609 Working Group, "IEEE Standard for Wireless
Access in Vehicular Environments - Security Services for
Applications and Management Messages", IEEE Std
1609.2-2016, March 2016.
[WAVE-1609.3]
IEEE 1609 Working Group, "IEEE Standard for Wireless
Access in Vehicular Environments (WAVE) - Networking
Services", IEEE Std 1609.3-2016, April 2016.
[WAVE-1609.4]
IEEE 1609 Working Group, "IEEE Standard for Wireless
Access in Vehicular Environments (WAVE) - Multi-Channel
Operation", IEEE Std 1609.4-2016, March 2016.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
Appendix A. Relevant Topics to IPWAVE Working Group
This section discusses topics relevant to IPWAVE WG: (i) vehicle
identity management; (ii) multihop V2X; (iii) multicast; (iv) DNS
naming services and service discovery; (v) IPv6 over cellular
networks.
A.1. Vehicle Identity Management
A vehicle can have multiple network interfaces using different access
network technologies [Identity-Management]. These multiple network
interfaces mean multiple identities. To identify a vehicle with
multiple indenties, a Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) can be used
as a globally unique vehicle identifier.
To support the seamless connectivity over the multiple identities, a
cross-layer network architecture is required with vertical handover
functionality [Identity-Management]. Also, an AAA service for
multiple identities should be provided to vehicles in an efficient
way to allow horizontal handover as well as vertical handover; note
that AAA stands for Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting.
A.2. Multihop V2X
Multihop packet forwarding among vehicles in 802.11-OCB mode shows an
unfavorable performance due to the common known broadcast-storm
problem [Broadcast-Storm]. This broadcast-storm problem can be
mitigated by the coordination (or scheduling) of a cluster head in a
connected VANET or an RSU in an intersection area, where the cluster
head can work as a coodinator for the access to wireless channels.
A.3. Multicast
IP multicast in vehicular network environments is especially useful
for various services. For instance, an automobile manufacturer can
multicast a particular group/class/type of vehicles for service
notification. As another example, a vehicle or an RSU can
disseminate alert messages in a particular area [Multicast-Alert].
In general IEEE 802 wireless media, some performance issues about
multicast are found in [Multicast-802]. Since several procedures and
functions based on IPv6 use multicast for control-plane messages,
such as Neighbor Discovery (ND) and Service Discovery,
[Multicast-802] describes that the ND process may fail due to
unreliable wireless link, causing failure of the DAD process. Also,
the Router Advertisement messages can be lost in multicasting.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
A.4. DNS Naming Services and Service Discovery
When two vehicular nodes communicate with each other using the DNS
name of the partner node, DNS naming service (i.e., DNS name
resolution) is required. As shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, a DNS
server within an internal network can perform such DNS name
resolution for the sake of other vehicular nodes.
A service discovery service is required for an application in a
vehicular node to search for another application or server in another
vehicular node, which resides in either the same internal network or
the other internal network. In V2I or V2V networking, as shown in
Figure 2 and Figure 3, such a service discovery service can be
provided by either DNS-based Service Discovery (DNS-SD) [RFC6763]
with mDNS [RFC6762] or the vehicular ND with a new option for service
discovery [ID-Vehicular-ND].
A.5. IPv6 over Cellular Networks
Recently, 3GPP has announced a set of new technical specifications,
such as Release 14 (3GPP-R14) [TS-23.285-3GPP], which proposes an
architecture enhancements for V2X services using the modified
sidelink interface that originally is designed for the LTE-Device-to-
Device (D2D) communications. 3GPP-R14 specifies that the V2X
services only support IPv6 implementation. 3GPP is also
investigating and discussing the evolved V2X services in the next
generation cellular networks, i.e., 5G new radio (5G-NR), for
advanced V2X communications and automated vehicles' applications.
A.5.1. Cellular V2X (C-V2X) Using 4G-LTE
Before 3GPP-R14, some researchers have studied the potential usage of
C-V2X communications. For example, [VMaSC-LTE] explores a multihop
cluster-based hybrid architecture using both DSRC and LTE for safety
message dissemination. Most of the research considers a short
message service for safety instead of IP datagram forwarding. In
other C-V2X research, the standard IPv6 is assumed.
The 3GPP technical specification of [TS-23.285-3GPP] states that both
IP based and non-IP based V2X messages are supported, and only IPv6
is supported for IP based messages. Moreover, [TS-23.285-3GPP]
instructs that a UE autoconfigures a link-local IPv6 address by
following SLAAC in [RFC4862], but without sending Neighbor
Solicitation and Neighbor Advertisement messages for DAD. This is
because a unique prefix is allocated to each node by the 3GPP
network, so the IPv6 addresses cannot be duplicate.
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
A.5.2. Cellular V2X (C-V2X) Using 5G
The emerging services, functions, and applications, which are
developped in automotive industry, demand reliable and efficient
communication infrastructure for road networks. Correspondingly,
enhanced V2X (eV2X)-based services can be supported by 5G systems.
The 3GPP Technical Report of [TR-22.886-3GPP] is studying new use
cases and the corresponding service requirements for V2X (including
V2V and V2I) using 5G in both infrastructure mode and the sidelink
variations in the future.
Appendix B. Changes from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-07
The following changes are made from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-
networking-07:
o This version is revised based on the comments from Charlie Perkins
and Sri Gundavelli.
o In Section 4.1, the existing protocols relevant to IP vehicular
networking are summarized and analyzed with pros and cons. This
subsection addresses the requirements for IP vehicular networking.
o In Figure 1, a vehicular network architecture is modified to
clarify a multi-link subnet consisting of vehicular wireless
links, and to provide efficient vehicular communications for V2I &
V2V to vehicles whose wireless interface is configured with a
global IP address.
Appendix C. Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the
National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of
Education (2017R1D1A1B03035885).
This work was supported in part by Global Research Laboratory Program
through the NRF funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT)
(NRF-2013K1A1A2A02078326) and by the DGIST R&D Program of the MSIT
(18-EE-01).
This work was supported in part by the French research project
DataTweet (ANR-13-INFR-0008) and in part by the HIGHTS project funded
by the European Commission I (636537-H2020).
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 35]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
Appendix D. Contributors
This document is a group work of IPWAVE working group, greatly
benefiting from inputs and texts by Rex Buddenberg (Naval
Postgraduate School), Thierry Ernst (YoGoKo), Bokor Laszlo (Budapest
University of Technology and Economics), Jose Santa Lozanoi
(Universidad of Murcia), Richard Roy (MIT), Francois Simon (Pilot),
Sri Gundavelli (Cisco), Erik Nordmark, and Dirk von Hugo (Deutsche
Telekom). The authors sincerely appreciate their contributions.
The following are co-authors of this document:
Nabil Benamar
Department of Computer Sciences
High School of Technology of Meknes
Moulay Ismail University
Morocco
Phone: +212 6 70 83 22 36
EMail: benamar73@gmail.com
Sandra Cespedes
NIC Chile Research Labs
Universidad de Chile
Av. Blanco Encalada 1975
Santiago
Chile
Phone: +56 2 29784093
EMail: scespede@niclabs.cl
Jerome Haerri
Communication Systems Department
EURECOM
Sophia-Antipolis
France
Phone: +33 4 93 00 81 34
EMail: jerome.haerri@eurecom.fr
Dapeng Liu
Alibaba
Beijing, Beijing 100022
China
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 36]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
Phone: +86 13911788933
EMail: max.ldp@alibaba-inc.com
Tae (Tom) Oh
Department of Information Sciences and Technologies
Rochester Institute of Technology
One Lomb Memorial Drive
Rochester, NY 14623-5603
USA
Phone: +1 585 475 7642
EMail: Tom.Oh@rit.edu
Charles E. Perkins
Futurewei Inc.
2330 Central Expressway
Santa Clara, CA 95050
USA
Phone: +1 408 330 4586
EMail: charliep@computer.org
Alexandre Petrescu
CEA, LIST
CEA Saclay
Gif-sur-Yvette, Ile-de-France 91190
France
Phone: +33169089223
EMail: Alexandre.Petrescu@cea.fr
Yiwen Chris Shen
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
Sungkyunkwan University
2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu
Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do 16419
Republic of Korea
Phone: +82 31 299 4106
Fax: +82 31 290 7996
EMail: chrisshen@skku.edu
URI: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-chris-shen.php
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 37]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement March 2019
Michelle Wetterwald
FBConsulting
21, Route de Luxembourg
Wasserbillig, Luxembourg L-6633
Luxembourg
EMail: Michelle.Wetterwald@gmail.com
Author's Address
Jaehoon Paul Jeong (editor)
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu
Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do 16419
Republic of Korea
Phone: +82 31 299 4957
Fax: +82 31 290 7996
EMail: pauljeong@skku.edu
URI: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php
Jeong, Ed. Expires September 25, 2019 [Page 38]