IPWAVE WG meeting at IETF 102 MONDAY, 16 July 2018 at 3:30-15:30 Chairs: Russ Housley, Carlos J. Bernardos Minute takers: Mike Montemurro Jabber scribe: Russ Housley ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Administrativia Presenters: Russ Housley and Carlos Bernardos ------------------------------------------------------------------------ We hope that draft-ietf-ipwave-over-80211ocb-25 went through 6man review, and Neighbor Discovery (ND) was raised as an issue. The chairs called for information about implementations and how ND was addressed, but we have not gotten much response. We need review on the Use Cases, Survey and Problem Statement document (draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-03). Without more discussion on the mail list, it cannot move forward. The Problem Statement will guide any recharter actions. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ** IPWAVE WG documents Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.11 Networks in mode Outside the Context of a Basic Service Set (IPv6-over-80211ocb) Presenter: Carlos Bernardos Draft: draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Alex Petrescu prepared slides, but he could not come to Montreal, so Carlos Bernardos presented the slides. Alex Petrescu (through the slides) said that the key change to the draft is to explain why traditional Neighbor Discovery (ND) works. It was suggested that ND should be removed from the draft. There is nothing new being introduced for ND, and it just works. Sri Gundavelli pointed out that ND does not work in this type of mobile environment. ND should be removed from the draft and addressed in another draft. Russ Housley raised three broad linds of traffic that need to be considered. First, IEEE 1609 traffic. It is not IPv6 traffic, and it is broadcast traffic. So, ND is not an issue here. Second, when vehicles are parked, stopped, moving slowly, or moving rapidly in the same direction at roughly the same speed (such as platooning), typical ND works. Third, when a car is moving rapidly down the highway, typical ND will not work in the short amount of time that a road-side unit is in radio range. Maybe the third case can be for future study in the document. Carlos Bernardos observes that there needs to be some ND work in the document for it to be approved. It was suggested that the group should look at RFC 6775; perhaps the 6lowpan ND solution will work here too. It was pointed out that phrase "over 802.11 links" is not accurate. IEEE 802.11 offere more than OCB and one other mode. The WG Chairs called for people to share implementation experience based on the existing Internet-Draft. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ IP-based Vehicular Networking: Use Cases, Survey and Problem Statement Presenter: Jaehoon Paul Jeong Draft: draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-04 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Version -04 has been posted yesterday. Erik Nordmark observed that the discussion of the IPv6 link model is incorrect. It is comparing with a model for IPv6 over Ethernet. It would be better to align with the way that 6lowpan uses the model, including asymmetric connectivity between neighbors and unidirectional links. The WG Chairs called for reviewers for this document. Looking for at least 3 reviewers. Michelle, Sri, Dick, and Ronald volunteered to review. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Other Business ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The WG Cchairs wer asked about plans to recharter. The Problem Statement portion of draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-03 will guide any recharter actions.