IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem Statement and Use Cases
draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-09
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (ipwave WG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Jaehoon Paul Jeong | ||
| Last updated | 2019-05-24 | ||
| Replaces | draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey, draft-ietf-ipwave-problem-statement | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | plain text xml htmlized pdfized bibtex | ||
| Reviews |
SECDIR Telechat review
(of
-28)
Has Nits
SECDIR Telechat review
(of
-27)
Has Issues
INTDIR Telechat review
(of
-27)
Ready with Issues
ARTART Telechat review
(of
-27)
Almost Ready
INTDIR Last Call review
(of
-20)
Not Ready
|
||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-09
IPWAVE Working Group J. Jeong, Ed.
Internet-Draft Sungkyunkwan University
Intended status: Informational May 24, 2019
Expires: November 25, 2019
IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem Statement
and Use Cases
draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-09
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 explains use
cases using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking. Next, it makes a problem
statement about key aspects in IP-based vehicular networking, such as
IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management, and Security & Privacy.
For each key aspect, this document specifies requirements in IP-based
vehicular networking, and suggests the direction of solutions
satisfying those requirements.
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 November 25, 2019.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
(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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. V2V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. V2I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. V2X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Vehicular Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Vehicular Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. V2I-based Internetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. V2V-based Internetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.1. Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.1.1. Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.1.2. MAC Address Pseudonym . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1.3. Prefix Dissemination/Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.1.4. Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2. Mobility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.3. Security and Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-
networking-08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Appendix B. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Appendix C. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
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] in the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) with
the frequency band of 5.850 - 5.925 GHz (i.e., 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 a radio spectrum for safety-related and non-safety-related
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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].
This document explains use cases and a problem statement about IP-
based vehicular networking for ITS, which is named IP Wireless Access
in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE). First, it introduces the use
cases for using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking in the ITS. Next, it
makes a problem statement about key aspects in IPWAVE, such as IPv6
Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management, and Security & Privacy. For
each key aspect of the problem statement, this document specifies
requirements in IP-based vehicular networking, and proposes the
direction of solutions fulfilling those requirements. 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 in near future.
2. Terminology
This document uses the following definitions:
o DMM: Acronym for "Distributed Mobility Management"
[RFC7333][RFC7429].
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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 physical communication
devices (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.
o OCB: Acronym for "Outside the Context of a Basic Service Set"
[IEEE-802.11-OCB].
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 Vehicle: A node that has an OBU for wireless communication with
other vehicles and RSUs. It has a radio navigation receiver of
Global Positioning System (GPS) for efficient navigation.
o Vehicular Ad Hoc Network (VANET): A network that consists of
vehicles interconnected by wireless communication. Since VANET is
a connected network component, two vehicles in a VANET can
communicate with each other through ad hoc routing via other
vehicles as relays even where they are out of one-hop wireless
communication range.
o Vehicular Cloud: A cloud infrastructure for vehicular networks,
having compute nodes, storage nodes, and network nodes.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
o Vehicle Detection Loop (i.e., Loop Detector): An inductive device
used for detecting vehicles passing or arriving at a certain
point, for instance, at an intersection with traffic lights or at
a ramp toward a highway. 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 explains 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;
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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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 the
cooperative environment sensing, driver-operated vehicles can use
environmental information sensed by driverless vehicles for better
interaction with the context.
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 an accident spot
while providing other vehicles near the accident spot with efficient
detour paths.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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 the 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 a network device for wireless communication (e.g.,
WiFi) with an RSU. 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.
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 the V2V scenario 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. Vehicular Networks
This section describes a vehicular network architecture supporting
V2V, V2I, and V2X communications in vehicular networks. Also, it
describes an internal network within a vehicle or RSU, and the
internetworking between the internal networks via DSRC links.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 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 Subnet3
<----> Wired Link <....> Wireless Link ===> Moving Direction
Figure 1: A Vehicular Network Architecture for V2I and V2V Networking
4.1. 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 November 25, 2019 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 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 two different subnets (denoted as
Subnet1 and Subnet2), respectively. Also, another vehicle (Vehicle4)
is wireless connected to RSU3, belonging to another subnet (denoted
as Subnet3).
In wireless subnets in vehicular networks (e.g., Subnet1 and Subnet2
in Figure 1), vehicles can construct a connected VANET (with 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 wireless communication
range for each other. On the other hand, Vehicle3 can communicate
with Vehicle4 via the vehicular infrastructure (i.e., RSU2 and RSU3)
by employing V2I (i.e., V2I2V) communication because they are not
within the wireless communication range for each other.
In vehicular networks, unidirectional links exist and must be
considered for wireless communications. Also, in the vehicular
networks, control plane can 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.
4.2. V2I-based Internetworking
This section discusses the internetworking between a vehicle's
internal network (i.e., moving network) and an RSU's internal network
(i.e., fixed network) via V2I communication.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
+-----------------+
(*)<........>(*) +----->| 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
Nowadays, a vehicle's internal network tends to be Ethernet to
interconnect electronic control units in a vehicle. It can also
support WiFi and Bluetooth to accommodate a driver's and passenger's
mobile devices (e.g., smartphone and tablet). In this trend, it is
reasonable to consider a vehicle's internal network (i.e., moving
network) and also the interaction between the internal network and an
external network within another vehicle or RSU.
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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
The network parameter discovery collects networking information for
an IP communication between a vehicle and an RSU or between two
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.
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. Thus, one host (Host1) in Vehicle1 can communicate with
one server (Server1) in RSU1 for a vehicular service through
Vehicle1's moving network, a wireless link between Vehicle1 and RSU1,
and RSU1's fixed network.
4.3. V2V-based Internetworking
This section discusses the internetworking between the moving
networks of two neighboring vehicles via V2V communication.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 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. Thus, one host (Host1) in Vehicle1
can communicate with one host (Host4) in Vehicle1 for a vehicular
service through Vehicle1's moving network, a wireless link between
Vehicle1 and Vehicle2, and Vehicle2's moving network.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
(*)<..................>(*)<..................>(*)
| | |
+-----------+ +-----------+ +-----------+
| | | | | |
| +-------+ | | +-------+ | | +-------+ |
| |Router1| | | |Router5| | | |Router7| |
| +-------+ | | +-------+ | | +-------+ |
| | | | | |
| +-------+ | | +-------+ | | +-------+ |
| | Host1 | | | | Host4 | | | | Host6 | |
| +-------+ | | +-------+ | | +-------+ |
| | | | | |
+-----------+ +-----------+ +-----------+
Vehicle1 Vehicle2 Vehicle3
<....> Wireless Link (*) Antenna
Figure 4: Multihop Internetworking between Two Vehicle Networks
Figure 4 shows multihop internetworking between the moving networks
of two vehicles in the same VANET. For example, Host1 in Vehicle1
can communicate with Host6 in Vehicle3 via Router 5 in Vehicle2 that
is an intermediate vehicle being connected to Vehicle1 and Vehicle3
in a linear topology as shown in the figure.
5. Problem Statement
This section makes a problem statement about key topics for IPWAVE
WG, such as neighbor discovery, mobility management, and security &
privacy.
5.1. Neighbor Discovery
IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (IPv6 ND) [RFC4861][RFC4862] is a core part
of the IPv6 protocol suite. IPv6 ND is designed for point-to-point
links and transit links (e.g., Ethernet). It assumes an efficient
and reliable support of multicast from the link layer for various
network operations such as MAC Address Resolution (AR) and Duplicate
Address Detection (DAD).
IPv6 ND needs to be extended to vehicular networking (e.g., V2V, V2I,
and V2X) in terms of DAD and ND-related parameters (e.g., Router
Lifetime). The vehicles are moving fast within the communication
coverage of a vehicular node (e.g., vehicle and RSU). Before the
vehicles can exchange application messages with each other, they need
to be configured with a link-local IPv6 address or a global IPv6
address, and recognize each other in the aspect of IPv6 ND.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
The legacy DAD assumes that a node with an IPv6 address can reach any
other node with the scope of its address at the time it claims its
address, and can hear any future claim for that address by another
party within the scope of its address for the duration of the address
ownership. However, the partioning and merging of VANETs makes this
assumption frequently invalid in vehicular networks.
The vehicular networks need to support a vehicular-network-wide DAD
by defining a scope that is compatible with the legacy DAD, and two
vehicles can communicate with each other when there exists a
communication path over VANET or a combination of VANETs and RSUs, as
shown in Figure 1. By using the vehicular-network-wide DAD, vehicles
can assure that their IPv6 addresses are unique in the vehicular
network whenever they are connected to the vehicular infrastructure
or become disconnected from it in the form of VANET. Even though a
unique IPv6 address can be derived from a globally unique MAC
address, this derivation yields a privacy issue of a vehicle as an
IPv6 node. The vehicular infrastructure having RSUs and an MA can
participate in the vehicular-network-wide DAD for the sake of
vehicles [RFC6775][RFC8505].
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.,
from 0.5 sec to 1 sec) for the NA messages to reduce collision
probability with other NA messages.
When ND is used in vehicular networks, 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 available yet. Thus,
ND needs to appropriately operate to support IP-based safety
applications.
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]
[RFC5889]. 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
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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.
A VANET can have multiple links between pairs of vehicles within
wireless communication range, as shown in Figure 4. When two
vehicles belong to the same VANET, but they are out of wireless
communication range, they cannot communicate directly with each
other. Assume that a global-scope IPv6 prefix is assigned to VANETs
in vehicular networks. Even though two vehicles in the same VANET
configure their IPv6 addresses with the same IPv6 prefix, they may
not communicate with each other not in a one hop in the same VANET
because of the multihop network connectivity. Thus, in this case,
the concept of a on-link IPv6 prefix does not hold because two
vehicles with the same on-link IPv6 prefix cannot communicate
directly with each other. Also, when two vehicles are located in two
different VANETs with the same IPv6 prefix, they cannot communicate
with each other. When these two VANETs are converged into one VANET,
the two vehicles can communicate with each other in a multihop
fashion. Therefore, a vehicular link model should consider the
frequent partitioning and merging of VANETs due to vehicle mobility.
An IPv6 prefix can be used in a multi-link subnet as an extended
subnet. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) needs to be
performed even in the multiple links where all of the links are
configured with the same subnet prefix [RFC4861][RFC4862]. Thus, a
vehicular link model can consider a multi-hop V2V (or V2I) over a
multi-link subnet in a vehicular network having multiple VANETs and
RSUs, as shown in Figure 1. For example, in this figure, vehicles
(i.e., Vehicle1, Vehicle2, and Vehicle3) in Subnet1 and Subnet2
having RSU1 and RSU2, respectively, construct a multi-link subnet
with VANETs and RSUs. Vehicle1 and Vehicle3 can also communicate
with each other via either multi-hop V2V or multi-hop V2I2V. When
two vehicles (e.g., Vehicle1 and Vehicle3 in Figure 1) are connected
in a VANET, it will be more efficient for them to 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.
Therefore, IPv6 ND needs to be extended for an efficient Vehicular
Neighbor Discovey (VND) to support the concept of an IPv6 link
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
corresponding to an IPv6 prefix even in a multi-link subnet
consisting of multiple vehicles and RSUs [ID-Vehicular-ND].
5.1.2. MAC Address Pseudonym
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.
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]).
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
5.1.4. Routing
For multihop V2V communications in a VANET (or a multi-link subnet),
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. However, it will be costly to run
both vehicular ND and a vehicular ad hoc routing protocol in terms of
control traffic overhead. As a feasible approach, Vehicular ND can
be extended to accommodate routing functionality with a prefix
discovery option. In this case, there is no need to run a separate
vehicular ad hoc routing protocol in VANETs. The ND extension can
allow vehicles to 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 cache) for the multi-link
subnet with a distance-vector algorithm [Intro-to-Algorithms].
Also, an efficient, rapid DAD needs to be supported in a vehicular
network having multiple VANETs (or a multi-link subnet) to prevent or
reduce IPv6 address conflicts in such a subnet. A feasible approach
is to use a multi-hop DAD optimization for the efficient vehicular-
network-wide DAD [RFC6775][RFC8505].
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 GPS receiver
for location information.
With a GPS navigator, an efficient mobility management will be
possible by vehicles periodically reporting their current position
and trajectory (i.e., navigation path) to the vehicular
infrastructure (having RSUs and an MA in TCC) [ID-Vehicular-MM].
This vehicular infrastructure 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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
With the prediction of the vehicle mobility, the vehicular
infrastructure needs to support RSUs to perform efficient 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 [ID-Vehicular-MM]. For example, when a vehicle is
moving 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. To prevent a hacker from impersonating RSUs as bogus
RSUs, RSUs and MA in the vehicular infrastructure need to have secure
channels via IPsec.
Therefore, with a proactive handover and a multihop DAD in vehicular
networks, RSUs needs to efficiently forward data packets from the
wired network (or the wireless network) to a moving destination
vehicle along its trajectory. As a result, a moving vehicle can
communicate with its corresponding vehicle in the vehicular network
or a host/server in the Internet along its trajectory.
5.3. Security and Privacy
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.
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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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.
7. Informative References
[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.
[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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
[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.
[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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
[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.
[ID-Vehicular-MM]
Jeong, J., Ed., Shen, Y., and Z. Xiang, "Vehicular
Mobility Management for IP-Based Vehicular Networks",
draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-mobility-management-00 (work
in progress), March 2019.
[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.
[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.
[IPv6-over-802.11-OCB]
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-45 (work in progress), April 2019.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
[ISO-ITS-IPv6]
ISO/TC 204, "Intelligent Transport Systems -
Communications Access for Land Mobiles (CALM) - IPv6
Networking", ISO 21210:2012, June 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.
[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.
[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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
[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.
[RFC8505] Thubert, P., Nordmark, E., Chakrabarti, S., and C.
Perkins, "Registration Extensions for IPv6 over Low-Power
Wireless Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN) Neighbor
Discovery", RFC 8505, November 2018.
[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.
[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.
[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.
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
[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.
[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 November 25, 2019 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-08
The following changes are made from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-
networking-08:
o This version is revised based on the comments from Charlie Perkins
and Sri Gundavelli.
o This version focuses on the problem statement about IP-based
vehicular networking, such as IPv6 neighbor discovery, mobility
management, and security & privacy.
Appendix B. 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 the MSIT (Ministry of Science and
ICT), Korea, under the ITRC (Information Technology Research Center)
support program (IITP-2019-2017-0-01633) supervised by the IITP
(Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion).
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).
Appendix C. 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, Dirk von Hugo (Deutsche
Telekom), and Pascal Thubert (Cisco). 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
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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
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
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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
Michelle Wetterwald
FBConsulting
21, Route de Luxembourg
Wasserbillig, Luxembourg L-6633
Luxembourg
EMail: Michelle.Wetterwald@gmail.com
Author's Address
Jeong, Ed. Expires November 25, 2019 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft IPWAVE Problem Statement May 2019
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 November 25, 2019 [Page 28]