--- 1/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-10.txt 2019-07-20 22:13:09.561738709 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-11.txt 2019-07-20 22:13:09.621740229 -0700 @@ -1,19 +1,19 @@ IPWAVE Working Group J. Jeong, Ed. Internet-Draft Sungkyunkwan University -Intended status: Informational July 8, 2019 -Expires: January 9, 2020 +Intended status: Informational July 20, 2019 +Expires: January 21, 2020 IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem Statement and Use Cases - draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-10 + draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-11 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 @@ -30,21 +30,21 @@ 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 January 9, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on January 21, 2020. 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents @@ -57,159 +57,154 @@ 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 4.3. V2V-based Internetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 + 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular- - networking-09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 - Appendix B. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 - Appendix C. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 - Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 + networking-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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 - 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]. + networking. The European Union (EU) allocated radio spectrum for + safety-related and non-safety-related applications of ITS with the + frequency band of 5.875 - 5.905 GHz, as part of the 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]. + WiFi standard 802.11 to enable driving safety services based on DSRC + 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. IEEE 802.11p was first a separate amendment, but was + later rolled into the base 802.11 standard (IEEE 802.11-2012) as IEEE + 802.11 Outside the Context of a Basic Service Set (OCB) 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]. + (PMIPv6) [RFC5213][RFC5844]) can be applied 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]. GN protocols are useful + to route an event or notification message to vehicles around a + geographic position, such as an accident 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- + This document describes 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 + cases for using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking in ITS. Next, it makes + a problem statement about key aspects in IPWAVE, namely, 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. + direction of solutions fulfilling those requirements. This document + is intended to motivate development of key protocols for IPWAVE. 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 LiDAR: "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. + binding table. An MA 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" + o OCB: "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. + in a road segment, but may also be located in a 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 Vehicle: A Vehicle in this document is 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. + vehicles interconnected by wireless communication. Two vehicles + in a VANET can communicate with each other using 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. + having compute nodes, storage nodes, and network forwarding + elements (e.g., switch and router). 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 V2I2P: "Vehicle to Infrastructure to Pedestrian". - o V2I2V: Acronym for "Vehicle to Infrastructure to Vehicle". + o V2I2V: "Vehicle to Infrastructure to Vehicle". - o WAVE: Acronym for "Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments" - [WAVE-1609.0]. + o WAVE: "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 @@ -221,130 +216,130 @@ 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 + to drive safely by alerting the drivers about 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. + automatic safety action plan, which considers three situations, + namely, the Line-of-Sight unsafe, Non-Line-of-Sight unsafe, and safe + situations. This action plan can be put into action among multiple + vehicles using 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. + trucks) to follow each other very closely. 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). 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 + vehicular communication for massive automotive sensing. A lot of + data can be generated by those sensors, and these data typically need + to 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. + interaction with the other vehicles and environment. 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. + A navigation service, for example, the Self-Adaptive Interactive + Navigation Tool (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 fast moving + paths to emergency vehicles (e.g., ambulance and fire engine) to let + them reach an accident spot while redirecting other vehicles near the + accident spot into efficient detour paths. - A TCC can recommend an energy-efficient speed to a vehicle driving in - different traffic environments. [Fuel-Efficient] studies fuel- + A TCC can recommend an energy-efficient speed to a vehicle that + depends on its traffic environment. [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 + network services, e.g., 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 + Application (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. + to be able to communicate with another vehicle. There are light- + weight mobile nodes such as bicycle and motorcycle, and they can + communicate directly with a vehicle for collision avoidance using + V2V. 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. Traffic Control Center in Vehicular Cloud *-----------------------------------------* * * - * +----------------+ * + * +-----------------+ * * | Mobility Anchor| * - * +----------------+ * + * +-----------------+ * * ^ * * | * *--------------------v--------------------* ^ ^ ^ | | | | | | v v v +--------+ Ethernet +--------+ +--------+ | RSU1 |<-------->| RSU2 |<---------->| RSU3 | +--------+ +--------+ +--------+ @@ -362,75 +357,72 @@ 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. Note that 2001:DB8::/32 is a documentation prefix + OBU have wireless media interfaces for VANET. Furthermore, 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. Note that 2001:DB8::/32 is a documentation prefix [RFC3849] for example prefixes in this document, and also that any routable IPv6 address needs to be routable in a VANET and a vehicular network including RSUs. - Especially, for IPv6 packets transporting over IEEE 802.11-OCB, - [IPv6-over-802.11-OCB] specifies several details, such as Maximum + For IPv6 packets transported over IEEE 802.11-OCB, + [IPv6-over-802.11-OCB] specifies several details, including 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 - 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. + subnet structure. An Ethernet Adaptation (EA) layer is in charge of + transforming some parameters between IEEE 802.11 MAC 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). + networks of RSU1 and RSU2 belong to two different subnets (Subnet1 + and Subnet2), respectively. Another vehicle (Vehicle4) belonging to + another subnet (Subnet3) is wirelessly connected to RSU3. 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. + In vehicular networks, asymmetric links sometimes exist and must be + considered for wireless communications. In vehicular networks, the + control plane can be separated from the data plane for efficient + mobility management and data forwarding. The mobility information of + a GPS receiver mounted in its vehicle (e.g., position, speed, and + direction) can be used to accommodate 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. 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. +-----------------+ (*)<........>(*) +----->| Vehicular Cloud | 2001:DB8:1:1::/64 | | | +-----------------+ @@ -460,68 +452,72 @@ <----> 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. + external network within another vehicle or RSU. A vehicle's internal + network often uses Ethernet to interconnect control units in the + vehicle. The internal network also supports WiFi and Bluetooth to + accommodate a driver's and passenger's mobile devices (e.g., + smartphone or tablet). It is reasonable to consider 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. + prefix discovery [ID-Vehicular-ND]. For ND-based prefix discovery, + network prefixes and parameters should be registered with 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 - 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. + For an IP communication between a vehicle and an RSU or between two + neighboring vehicles, the network parameter discovery collects + information relevant to the link layer, MAC layer, and IP layer. The + link layer information includes wireless link layer parameters and + 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. A DNS service should be supported for the DNS name resolution of in-vehicle devices within a vehicle's internal network as well as for the DNS name resolution of those devices from a remote host in the Internet for on-line - diagnosis (e.g., an automotive service center server). 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. + diagnosis (e.g., an automotive service center server). The DNS names + of in-vehicle devices and their service names can be registered with + 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 + Figure 2 also 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 (a mobile router) and RSU1's Router3 (a fixed + router) use 2001:DB8:1:1::/64 for an external link (e.g., DSRC) for + V2I 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. (*)<..........>(*) 2001:DB8:1:1::/64 | | @@ -552,26 +548,26 @@ 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. + Vehicle1's Router1 (a mobile router) and Vehicle2's Router5 (a 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. (*)<..................>(*)<..................>(*) | | | +-----------+ +-----------+ +-----------+ | | | | | | | +-------+ | | +-------+ | | +-------+ | | |Router1| | | |Router5| | | |Router7| | | +-------+ | | +-------+ | | +-------+ | | | | | | | | +-------+ | | +-------+ | | +-------+ | @@ -586,206 +582,198 @@ 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. + This section presents key topics 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. + DAD and ND-related parameters (e.g., Router Lifetime) need to be + extended to vehicular networking (e.g., V2V, V2I, and V2X). Vehicles + move quickly within the communication coverage of any particular + vehicle or 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 run IPv6 ND. 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]. + or become disconnected from it in the form of VANET. A vehicular + infrastructure having RSUs and an MA can participate in the + vehicular-network-wide DAD for the sake of vehicles [RFC6775]. For + the vehicle as an IPv6 node, deriving a unique IPv6 address from a + globally unique MAC address creates a privacy issue. Refer to + Section 5.3 for the discussion about such a privacy issue. 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. According to a report from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) [NHTSA-ACAS-Report], an extra 0.5 second of warning time can prevent about 60% of the collisions of vehicles moving closely in a roadway. A warning message should be exchanged - every 0.5 seconds. Thus, if the ND messages (e.g., NS and NA) are + every 0.5 second. Thus, if the ND messages (e.g., NS and NA) are used as warning messages, they should be exchanged every 0.5 second. 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. + bounded data delivery is critical. Implementations for such + applications are not available yet. ND needs work 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 - link model is required for a dynamically changing vehicular wireless - link. + connectivity among neighboring interfaces [RFC6250]. However, + interference and different levels of transmission power may cause + asymmetric 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. 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 + other. Suppose 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 + the concept of an 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. The vehicular link model needs to support the multihop routing in a connected VANET where the vehicles with the same global-scope IPv6 prefix are connected in one hop or multiple hops. It also needs to - support the multhop routing in multiple connected VANETs via an RSU - that has the wireless connectivity with each VANET. For example, - assume that Vehicle1, Vehicle 2, and Vehicle3 are configured with - their IPv6 addresses based on the same global-scope IPv6 prefix. - 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 + support the multihop routing in multiple connected VANETs via an RSU + that has the wireless connectivity with each VANET. For example, in + Figure 1, suppose that Vehicle1, Vehicle2, and Vehicle3 are + configured with their IPv6 addresses based on the same global-scope + IPv6 prefix. Vehicle1 and Vehicle3 can also communicate with each + other via either multi-hop V2V or multi-hop V2I2V. When two vehicles + of Vehicle1 and Vehicle3 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. Thus, two separate VANETs - can merge into one network via RSU(s). Also, newly arriving vehicles - can merge two separate VANETs into one VANET if they can play a role - of a relay node for those VANETs. + than RSUs. On the other hand, when the two vehicles of 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, two separate VANETs can + merge into one network via RSU(s). Also, newly arriving vehicles can + merge two separate VANETs into one VANET if they can play a role of a + relay node for those VANETs. 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. + For the protection of drivers' privacy, a pseudonym of a MAC address + of a vehicle's network interface should be used, so that 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. + high mobility and density, this DAD should be performed efficiently + with minimum overhead so that the vehicles can exchange warning + messages with each other every 0.5 second [NHTSA-ACAS-Report]. 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]). + Figure 2 and Figure 3. In this case, nodes within the internal + networks of two vehicles (or within the internal networks of a + vehicle and an RSU) want to communicate with each other. For this + communication on the wireless link, the network prefix dissemination + or exchange is required. Either a vehicle or an RSU needs an + external network interface for 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) 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] or OLSRv2 [RFC7181]). 5.1.4. Routing - For multihop V2V communications in a VANET (or a multi-link subnet), + For multihop V2V communications in either a VANET or VANETs via RSUs, 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 [ID-Multicast-Problems]. 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]. + control traffic overhead [ID-Multicast-Problems]. - 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]. + Vehicular ND can be extended to accommodate routing functionality + with a prefix discovery option. 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 VANETs with a distance-vector + algorithm [Intro-to-Algorithms]. 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 @@ -798,48 +786,46 @@ 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. - 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. + By predicting a vehicle's mobility, the vehicular infrastructure can + better 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 advance + along with the movement of the vehicle [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. + vehicle 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 + Sybil attack, which tries to confuse 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. Note that good vehicles are ones with valid certificates that are determined by the authentication process with an authentication server in the vehicular network. 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 @@ -860,40 +846,40 @@ 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- + should not interrupt the E2E communications between two vehicles (or + between a vehicle and an 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. For the IPv6 ND, the vehicular-network-wide DAD is required for the uniqueness of the IPv6 address of a vehicle's wireless interface. This DAD can be used as a flooding attack that makes the DAD-related ND packets are disseminated over the VANET and vehicular network - including the RSU and the MA. The vehicles and RSUs need to filter + including the RSUs and the MA. The vehicles and RSUs need to filter out suspicious ND traffic in advance. - For the mobility management, a malicious vehicle constructs multiple - virtual bogus vehicles, and register them with the RSU and the MA. - This registration makes the RSU and MA waste their resources. The - RSU and MA need to determine whether a vehicle is genuine or bogus in - the mobility management. + For the mobility management, a malicious vehicle can construct + multiple virtual bogus vehicles, and register them with the RSU and + the MA. This registration makes the RSU and MA waste their + resources. The RSU and MA need to determine whether a vehicle is + genuine or bogus in the mobility management. 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. @@ -1050,70 +1036,55 @@ [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. + [RFC6250] Thaler, D., "Evolution of the IP Model", RFC 6250, May + 2011. + [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. - [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. @@ -1137,52 +1108,34 @@ [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. -Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-09 +Appendix A. Changes from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-10 The following changes are made from draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular- - networking-09: - - o This version is revised based on the comments from Charlie - Perkins. - - o For the question on the preference on a multi-link subnet model, - the revision does not suggest the multi-link subnet model as a - possible solution, focusing on the characteristics and - requirements for a vehicular link model. - - o The motivation about DNS in a vehicle network is addressed - clearly. - - o The timing importance of ND is addressed with a reference to - [NHTSA-ACAS-Report]. - - o The Security Considerations are expanded with cross references to - other parts of the document such as IPv6 ND and mobility - management. + networking-10: - o 2001:DB8::/32 is a reserved prefix for use in documentation - [RFC3849]. Any routable IPv6 address needs to be routable in a - VANET and a vehicular network including RSUs. + o This version is revised based on the comments from Charlie Perkins + and Sri Gundavelli. - o With an example in Figure 1, it is suggested that two separate - VANETs can merge into one network. + o Many editorial comments and questions from Charlie Perkins are + addressed in this document. - o A suggestion is made about how to distinguish good nodes from bad - nodes with an authentication process. + o According to Sri Gundavelli's comments, the solution text and RFC + 8505 reference for the vehicular ND are deleted from Section 5.1 + in this document. 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 @@ -1273,31 +1226,31 @@ 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 - Jaehoon Paul Jeong (editor) - Department of Software + Department of Computer Science and Engineering 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