draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-19.txt | draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-20.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
IPWAVE Working Group J. Jeong, Ed. | IPWAVE Working Group J. Jeong, Ed. | |||
Internet-Draft Sungkyunkwan University | Internet-Draft Sungkyunkwan University | |||
Intended status: Informational July 29, 2020 | Intended status: Informational March 18, 2021 | |||
Expires: January 30, 2021 | Expires: September 19, 2021 | |||
IPv6 Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem | IPv6 Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE): Problem | |||
Statement and Use Cases | Statement and Use Cases | |||
draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-19 | draft-ietf-ipwave-vehicular-networking-20 | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
This document discusses the problem statement and use cases of | This document discusses the problem statement and use cases of | |||
IPv6-based vehicular networking for Intelligent Transportation | IPv6-based vehicular networking for Intelligent Transportation | |||
Systems (ITS). The main scenarios of vehicular communications are | Systems (ITS). The main scenarios of vehicular communications are | |||
vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), and | vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), and | |||
vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications. First, this document | vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications. First, this document | |||
explains use cases using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking. Next, for | explains use cases using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking. Next, for | |||
IPv6-based vehicular networks, it makes a gap analysis of current | IPv6-based vehicular networks, it makes a gap analysis of current | |||
IPv6 protocols (e.g., IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management, | IPv6 protocols (e.g., IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management, | |||
and Security & Privacy), and then lists up requirements for the | and Security & Privacy), and then enumerates requirements for the | |||
extensions of those IPv6 protocols for IPv6-based vehicular | extensions of those IPv6 protocols for IPv6-based vehicular | |||
networking. | networking. | |||
Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 30, 2021. | This Internet-Draft will expire on September 19, 2021. | |||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
skipping to change at page 2, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 23 ¶ | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
3.1. V2V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.1. V2V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
3.2. V2I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.2. V2I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
3.3. V2X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 3.3. V2X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
4. Vehicular Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 4. Vehicular Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
4.1. Vehicular Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 4.1. Vehicular Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
4.2. V2I-based Internetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 4.2. V2I-based Internetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
4.3. V2V-based Internetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 4.3. V2V-based Internetworking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
5. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 5. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
5.1. Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 5.1. Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
5.1.1. Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 5.1.1. Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
5.1.2. MAC Address Pseudonym . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 5.1.2. MAC Address Pseudonym . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
5.1.3. Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 5.1.3. Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
5.2. Mobility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 5.2. Mobility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | |||
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | |||
8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | |||
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 | |||
Appendix B. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 | Appendix B. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 | |||
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 | Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 | |||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
Vehicular networking studies have mainly focused on improving safety | Vehicular networking studies have mainly focused on improving safety | |||
and efficiency, and also enabling entertainment in vehicular | and efficiency, and also enabling entertainment in vehicular | |||
networks. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the US | networks. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the US | |||
allocated wireless channels for Dedicated Short-Range Communications | allocated wireless channels for Dedicated Short-Range Communications | |||
(DSRC) [DSRC] in the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) with | (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- | 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), | based wireless communications can support vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V), | |||
skipping to change at page 3, line 42 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 42 ¶ | |||
approved a standard specifying the IPv6 network protocols and | approved a standard specifying the IPv6 network protocols and | |||
services to be used for Communications Access for Land Mobiles (CALM) | services to be used for Communications Access for Land Mobiles (CALM) | |||
[ISO-ITS-IPv6] [ISO-ITS-IPv6-AMD1]. | [ISO-ITS-IPv6] [ISO-ITS-IPv6-AMD1]. | |||
This document describes use cases and a problem statement about | This document describes use cases and a problem statement about | |||
IPv6-based vehicular networking for ITS, which is named IPv6 Wireless | IPv6-based vehicular networking for ITS, which is named IPv6 Wireless | |||
Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE). First, it introduces the | Access in Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE). First, it introduces the | |||
use cases for using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking in ITS. Next, for | use cases for using V2V, V2I, and V2X networking in ITS. Next, for | |||
IPv6-based vehicular networks, it makes a gap analysis of current | IPv6-based vehicular networks, it makes a gap analysis of current | |||
IPv6 protocols (e.g., IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management, | IPv6 protocols (e.g., IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, Mobility Management, | |||
and Security & Privacy), and then lists up requirements for the | and Security & Privacy), and then enumerates requirements for the | |||
extensions of those IPv6 protocols, which are tailored to IPv6-based | extensions of those IPv6 protocols, which are tailored to IPv6-based | |||
vehicular networking. Thus, this document is intended to motivate | vehicular networking. Thus, this document is intended to motivate | |||
development of key protocols for IPWAVE. | development of key protocols for IPWAVE. | |||
2. Terminology | 2. Terminology | |||
This document uses the terminology described in [RFC8691]. In | This document uses the terminology described in [RFC8691]. In | |||
addition, the following terms are defined below: | addition, the following terms are defined below: | |||
o Class-Based Safety Plan: A vehicle can make a safety plan by | o Class-Based Safety Plan: A vehicle can make a safety plan by | |||
skipping to change at page 5, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 46 ¶ | |||
(e.g., average vehicle speed and vehicle inter-arrival time per | (e.g., average vehicle speed and vehicle inter-arrival time per | |||
road segment) and vehicle information (e.g., a vehicle's | road segment) and vehicle information (e.g., a vehicle's | |||
identifier, position, direction, speed, and trajectory as a | identifier, position, direction, speed, and trajectory as a | |||
navigation path). TCC is part of a vehicular cloud for vehicular | navigation path). TCC is part of a vehicular cloud for vehicular | |||
networks. | networks. | |||
o Vehicle: A Vehicle in this document is a node that has an IP-OBU | o Vehicle: A Vehicle in this document is a node that has an IP-OBU | |||
for wireless communication with other vehicles and IP-RSUs. It | for wireless communication with other vehicles and IP-RSUs. It | |||
has a GPS radio navigation receiver for efficient navigation. Any | has a GPS radio navigation receiver for efficient navigation. Any | |||
device having an IP-OBU and a GPS receiver (e.g., smartphone and | device having an IP-OBU and a GPS receiver (e.g., smartphone and | |||
table PC) can be regarded as a vehicle in this document. | tablet PC) can be regarded as a vehicle in this document. | |||
o Vehicular Ad Hoc Network (VANET): A network that consists of | o Vehicular Ad Hoc Network (VANET): A network that consists of | |||
vehicles interconnected by wireless communication. Two vehicles | vehicles interconnected by wireless communication. Two vehicles | |||
in a VANET can communicate with each other using other vehicles as | in a VANET can communicate with each other using other vehicles as | |||
relays even where they are out of one-hop wireless communication | relays even where they are out of one-hop wireless communication | |||
range. | range. | |||
o Vehicular Cloud: A cloud infrastructure for vehicular networks, | o Vehicular Cloud: A cloud infrastructure for vehicular networks, | |||
having compute nodes, storage nodes, and network forwarding | having compute nodes, storage nodes, and network forwarding | |||
elements (e.g., switch and router). | elements (e.g., switch and router). | |||
skipping to change at page 7, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 17 ¶ | |||
safe, secure, privacy-preserving way. | safe, secure, privacy-preserving way. | |||
The use cases presented in this section serve as the description and | The use cases presented in this section serve as the description and | |||
motivation for the need to extend IPv6 and its protocols to | motivation for the need to extend IPv6 and its protocols to | |||
facilitate "Vehicular IPv6". Section 5 summarizes the overall | facilitate "Vehicular IPv6". Section 5 summarizes the overall | |||
problem statement and IPv6 requirements. Note that the adjective | problem statement and IPv6 requirements. Note that the adjective | |||
"Vehicular" in this document is used to represent extensions of | "Vehicular" in this document is used to represent extensions of | |||
existing protocols such as IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, IPv6 Mobility | existing protocols such as IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, IPv6 Mobility | |||
Management (e.g., PMIPv6 [RFC5213] and DMM [RFC7429]), and IPv6 | Management (e.g., PMIPv6 [RFC5213] and DMM [RFC7429]), and IPv6 | |||
Security and Privacy Mechanisms rather than new "vehicular-specific" | Security and Privacy Mechanisms rather than new "vehicular-specific" | |||
functions. Refer to Section 5 for the problem statement of the | functions. | |||
requirements of vehicular IPv6. | ||||
3.1. V2V | 3.1. V2V | |||
The use cases of V2V networking discussed in this section include | The use cases of V2V networking discussed in this section include | |||
o Context-aware navigation for safe driving and collision avoidance; | o Context-aware navigation for safe driving and collision avoidance; | |||
o Cooperative adaptive cruise control in a roadway; | o Cooperative adaptive cruise control in a roadway; | |||
o Platooning in a highway; | o Platooning in a highway; | |||
skipping to change at page 9, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 12 ¶ | |||
To encourage more vehicles to participate in this cooperative | To encourage more vehicles to participate in this cooperative | |||
environmental sensing, a reward system will be needed. Sensing | environmental sensing, a reward system will be needed. Sensing | |||
activities of each vehicle need to be logged in either a central way | activities of each vehicle need to be logged in either a central way | |||
through a logging server (e.g., TCC) in the vehicular cloud or a | through a logging server (e.g., TCC) in the vehicular cloud or a | |||
distributed way (e.g., blockchain [Bitcoin]) through other vehicles | distributed way (e.g., blockchain [Bitcoin]) through other vehicles | |||
or infrastructure. In the case of a blockchain, each sensing message | or infrastructure. In the case of a blockchain, each sensing message | |||
from a vehicle can be treated as a transaction and the neighboring | from a vehicle can be treated as a transaction and the neighboring | |||
vehicles can play the role of peers in a consensus method of a | vehicles can play the role of peers in a consensus method of a | |||
blockchain [Bitcoin][Vehicular-BlockChain]. | blockchain [Bitcoin][Vehicular-BlockChain]. | |||
The existing IPv6 protocol must be augmented through the addition of | Although a Layer-2 solution can provide a support for multihop | |||
an Overlay Multilink Network (OMNI) Interface [OMNI] and/or protocol | communications in vehicular networks, the scalability issue related | |||
changes in order to support wireless single-hop V2V communications as | to multihop forwarding still remains when vehicles need to | |||
well as wireless multihop V2V communications. Thus, the IPv6 needs | disseminate or forward packets toward multihop-away destinations. In | |||
to support both single-hop and multihop communications in a wireless | addition, the IPv6-based approach for V2V as a network layer protocol | |||
medium so that vehicles can communicate with each other by V2V | can accommodate multiple radio technologies as MAC protocols, such as | |||
communications to share either an emergency situation or road hazard | 5G V2X and DSRC. Therefore, the existing IPv6 protocol can be | |||
in a highway. | augmented through the addition of an Overlay Multilink Network (OMNI) | |||
Interface [OMNI] and/or protocol changes in order to support both | ||||
wireless single-hop/multihop V2V communications and multiple radio | ||||
technologies in vehicular networks. In such a way, vehicles can | ||||
communicate with each other by V2V communications to share either an | ||||
emergency situation or road hazard in a highway having multiple kinds | ||||
of radio technologies, such as 5G V2X and DSRC. | ||||
To support applications of these V2V use cases, the functions of IPv6 | To support applications of these V2V use cases, the functions of IPv6 | |||
such as VND and VSP are prerequisites for IPv6-based packet exchange | such as VND and VSP are prerequisites for IPv6-based packet exchange | |||
and secure, safe communication between two vehicles. | and secure, safe communication between two vehicles. | |||
3.2. V2I | 3.2. V2I | |||
The use cases of V2I networking discussed in this section include | The use cases of V2I networking discussed in this section include | |||
o Navigation service; | o Navigation service; | |||
skipping to change at page 10, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 32 ¶ | |||
and maintain an interoperable public safety broadband network for | and maintain an interoperable public safety broadband network for | |||
safety and security network services, e.g., emergency calls. The | safety and security network services, e.g., emergency calls. The | |||
construction of the nationwide FirstNet network requires each state | construction of the nationwide FirstNet network requires each state | |||
in the US to have a Radio Access Network (RAN) that will connect to | 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 | the FirstNet's network core. The current RAN is mainly constructed | |||
using 4G-LTE for the communication between a vehicle and an | using 4G-LTE for the communication between a vehicle and an | |||
infrastructure node (i.e., V2I) [FirstNet-Report], but it is expected | infrastructure node (i.e., V2I) [FirstNet-Report], but it is expected | |||
that DSRC-based vehicular networks [DSRC] will be available for V2I | that DSRC-based vehicular networks [DSRC] will be available for V2I | |||
and V2V in the near future. | and V2V in the near future. | |||
An EV charging service with V2I can facilitates the efficient battery | An EV charging service with V2I can facilitate the efficient battery | |||
charging of EVs. In the case where an EV charging station is | charging of EVs. In the case where an EV charging station is | |||
connected to an IP-RSU, an EV can be guided toward the deck of the EV | connected to an IP-RSU, an EV can be guided toward the deck of the EV | |||
charging station through a battery charging server connected to the | charging station through a battery charging server connected to the | |||
IP-RSU. In addition to this EV charging service, other value-added | IP-RSU. In addition to this EV charging service, other value-added | |||
services (e.g., air firmware/software update and media streaming) can | services (e.g., air firmware/software update and media streaming) can | |||
be provided to an EV while it is charging its battery at the EV | be provided to an EV while it is charging its battery at the EV | |||
charging station. | charging station. | |||
A UAM navigation service with efficient battery charging can make the | A UAM navigation service with efficient battery charging can plan the | |||
battery charging schedule of UAM end systems (e.g., drone) for long- | battery charging schedule of UAM end systems (e.g., drone) for long- | |||
distance flying [CBDN]. For this battery charging schedule, a UAM | distance flying [CBDN]. For this battery charging schedule, a UAM | |||
end system can communicate with an infrastructure node (e.g., IP-RSU) | end system can communicate with an infrastructure node (e.g., IP-RSU) | |||
toward a cloud server via V2I communications. This cloud server can | toward a cloud server via V2I communications. This cloud server can | |||
coordinate the battery charging schedules of multiple UAM end systems | coordinate the battery charging schedules of multiple UAM end systems | |||
for their efficient navigation path, considering flight time from | for their efficient navigation path, considering flight time from | |||
their current position to a battery charging station, waiting time in | their current position to a battery charging station, waiting time in | |||
a waiting queue at the station, and battery charging time at the | a waiting queue at the station, and battery charging time at the | |||
station. | station. | |||
skipping to change at page 14, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 44 ¶ | |||
Center (TCC) is connected to the Vehicular Cloud for the management | Center (TCC) is connected to the Vehicular Cloud for the management | |||
of IP-RSUs and vehicles in the road network. A Mobility Anchor (MA) | of IP-RSUs and vehicles in the road network. A Mobility Anchor (MA) | |||
may be located in the TCC as a mobility management controller. | may be located in the TCC as a mobility management controller. | |||
Vehicle2, Vehicle3, and Vehicle4 are wirelessly connected to IP-RSU1, | Vehicle2, Vehicle3, and Vehicle4 are wirelessly connected to IP-RSU1, | |||
IP-RSU2, and IP-RSU3, respectively. The three wireless networks of | IP-RSU2, and IP-RSU3, respectively. The three wireless networks of | |||
IP-RSU1, IP-RSU2, and IP-RSU3 can belong to three different subnets | IP-RSU1, IP-RSU2, and IP-RSU3 can belong to three different subnets | |||
(i.e., Subnet1, Subnet2, and Subnet3), respectively. Those three | (i.e., Subnet1, Subnet2, and Subnet3), respectively. Those three | |||
subnets use three different prefixes (i.e., Prefix1, Prefix2, and | subnets use three different prefixes (i.e., Prefix1, Prefix2, and | |||
Prefix3). | Prefix3). | |||
Multiple vehicles under the coverage of an RSU share a prefix such | Multiple vehicles under the coverage of an RSU share a prefix just as | |||
that mobile nodes share a prefix of a Wi-Fi access point in a | mobile nodes share a prefix of a Wi-Fi access point in a wireless | |||
wireless LAN. This is a natural characteristic in infrastructure- | LAN. This is a natural characteristic in infrastructure-based | |||
based wireless networks. For example, in Figure 1, two vehicles | wireless networks. For example, in Figure 1, two vehicles (i.e., | |||
(i.e., Vehicle2, and Vehicle5) can use Prefix 1 to configure their | Vehicle2, and Vehicle5) can use Prefix 1 to configure their IPv6 | |||
IPv6 global addresses for V2I communication. Alternatively, mobile | global addresses for V2I communication. Alternatively, mobile nodes | |||
nodes can employ an OMNI interface and use their own IPv6 Unique | can employ an OMNI interface and use their own IPv6 Unique Local | |||
Local Addresses (ULAs) [RFC4193] over the wireless network without | Addresses (ULAs) [RFC4193] over the wireless network without | |||
requiring the messaging of IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration | requiring the messaging of IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration | |||
(SLAAC) [RFC4862], which uses an on-link prefix provided by the | (SLAAC) [RFC4862], which uses an on-link prefix provided by the | |||
(visited) wireless LAN; this technique is known as "Bring-Your-Own- | (visited) wireless LAN; this technique is known as "Bring-Your-Own- | |||
Addresses". | Addresses". | |||
A single subnet prefix announced by an RSU can span multiple vehicles | A single subnet prefix announced by an RSU can span multiple vehicles | |||
in VANET. For example, in Figure 1, for Prefix 1, three vehicles | in VANET. For example, in Figure 1, for Prefix 1, three vehicles | |||
(i.e., Vehicle1, Vehicle2, and Vehicle5) can construct a connected | (i.e., Vehicle1, Vehicle2, and Vehicle5) can construct a connected | |||
VANET. Also, for Prefix 2, two vehicles (i.e., Vehicle3 and | VANET. Also, for Prefix 2, two vehicles (i.e., Vehicle3 and | |||
Vehicle6) can construct another connected VANET, and for Prefix 3, | Vehicle6) can construct another connected VANET, and for Prefix 3, | |||
skipping to change at page 19, line 39 ¶ | skipping to change at page 19, line 39 ¶ | |||
the wireless link interfaces for IP-OBU and IP-RSU can be either | the wireless link interfaces for IP-OBU and IP-RSU can be either | |||
global IPv6 addresses, or IPv6 ULAs as long as IPv6 packets can be | global IPv6 addresses, or IPv6 ULAs as long as IPv6 packets can be | |||
routed within vehicular networks [OMNI]. When global IPv6 addresses | routed within vehicular networks [OMNI]. When global IPv6 addresses | |||
are used, wireless interface configuration and control overhead for | are used, wireless interface configuration and control overhead for | |||
Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) [RFC4862] and Multicast Listener | Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) [RFC4862] and Multicast Listener | |||
Discovery (MLD) [RFC2710][RFC3810] should be minimized to support V2I | Discovery (MLD) [RFC2710][RFC3810] should be minimized to support V2I | |||
and V2X communications for vehicles moving fast along roadways; when | and V2X communications for vehicles moving fast along roadways; when | |||
ULAs and the OMNI interface are used, no DAD nor MLD messaging is | ULAs and the OMNI interface are used, no DAD nor MLD messaging is | |||
needed. | needed. | |||
Let us consider the upload/download time of a vehicle when it passes | ||||
through the wireless communication coverage of an IP-RSU. For a | ||||
given typical setting where 1km is the maximum DSRC communication | ||||
range [DSRC] and 100km/h is the speed limit in highway, the dwelling | ||||
time can be calculated to be 72 seconds by dividing the diameter of | ||||
the 2km (i.e., two times of DSRC communication range where an IP-RSU | ||||
is located in the center of the circle of wireless communication) by | ||||
the speed limit of 100km/h (i.e., about 28m/s). For the 72 seconds, | ||||
a vehicle passing through the coverage of an IP-RSU can upload and | ||||
download data packets to/from the IP-RSU. | ||||
4.3. V2V-based Internetworking | 4.3. V2V-based Internetworking | |||
This section discusses the internetworking between the moving | This section discusses the internetworking between the moving | |||
networks of two neighboring vehicles via V2V communication. | networks of two neighboring vehicles via V2V communication. | |||
(*)<..........>(*) | (*)<..........>(*) | |||
(2001:DB8:1:1::/64) | | | (2001:DB8:1:1::/64) | | | |||
+------------------------------+ +------------------------------+ | +------------------------------+ +------------------------------+ | |||
| v | | v | | | v | | v | | |||
| +-------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +-------+ | | | +-------+ +-------+ | | +-------+ +-------+ | | |||
skipping to change at page 25, line 49 ¶ | skipping to change at page 26, line 6 ¶ | |||
an IPv6 address pair. However, the pseudonym handling is not | an IPv6 address pair. However, the pseudonym handling is not | |||
implemented and tested yet for applications on IP-based vehicular | implemented and tested yet for applications on IP-based vehicular | |||
networking. | networking. | |||
In the ETSI standards, for the sake of security and privacy, an ITS | In the ETSI standards, for the sake of security and privacy, an ITS | |||
station (e.g., vehicle) can use pseudonyms for its network interface | station (e.g., vehicle) can use pseudonyms for its network interface | |||
identities (e.g., MAC address) and the corresponding IPv6 addresses | identities (e.g., MAC address) and the corresponding IPv6 addresses | |||
[Identity-Management]. Whenever the network interface identifier | [Identity-Management]. Whenever the network interface identifier | |||
changes, the IPv6 address based on the network interface identifier | changes, the IPv6 address based on the network interface identifier | |||
needs to be updated, and the uniqueness of the address needs to be | needs to be updated, and the uniqueness of the address needs to be | |||
checked through the DAD procedure. For vehicular networks with high | checked through the DAD procedure. | |||
mobility and density, this DAD needs to be performed efficiently with | ||||
minimum overhead so that the vehicles can exchange application | For vehicular networks with high mobility and density, the DAD needs | |||
messages (e.g., collision avoidance and accident notification) with | to be performed efficiently with minimum overhead so that the | |||
each other with a short interval (e.g., 0.5 second) | vehicles can exchange a driving safety message (e.g., collision | |||
[NHTSA-ACAS-Report]. | avoidance and accident notification) with each other with a short | |||
interval (e.g., 0.5 second) by a technical report from NHTSA | ||||
(National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) [NHTSA-ACAS-Report]. | ||||
Such a driving safety message may include a vehicle's mobility | ||||
information (i.e., position, speed, direction, and acceleration/ | ||||
deceleration). The exchange interval of this message is 0.5 second, | ||||
which is required to allow a driver to avoid a rear-end crash from | ||||
another vehicle. | ||||
5.1.3. Routing | 5.1.3. Routing | |||
For multihop V2V communications in either a VANET or VANETs via IP- | For multihop V2V communications in either a VANET or VANETs via IP- | |||
RSUs, a vehicular Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET) routing protocol may | RSUs, a vehicular Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET) routing protocol may | |||
be required to support both unicast and multicast in the links of the | 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 | 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 | both vehicular ND and a vehicular ad hoc routing protocol in terms of | |||
control traffic overhead [ID-Multicast-Problems]. | control traffic overhead [ID-Multicast-Problems]. | |||
skipping to change at page 27, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 27, line 39 ¶ | |||
vehicular-network-wide DAD is required. If DHCPv6 is used to assign | vehicular-network-wide DAD is required. If DHCPv6 is used to assign | |||
a unique IPv6 address to each vehicle in this shared link, the DAD is | a unique IPv6 address to each vehicle in this shared link, the DAD is | |||
not required. On the other hand, for a mobility management scheme | not required. On the other hand, for a mobility management scheme | |||
with a unique prefix per mobile node (e.g., PMIPv6 [RFC5213] and OMNI | with a unique prefix per mobile node (e.g., PMIPv6 [RFC5213] and OMNI | |||
[OMNI]), DAD is not required because the IPv6 address of a vehicle's | [OMNI]), DAD is not required because the IPv6 address of a vehicle's | |||
external wireless interface is guaranteed to be unique. There is a | external wireless interface is guaranteed to be unique. There is a | |||
tradeoff between the prefix usage efficiency and DAD overhead. Thus, | tradeoff between the prefix usage efficiency and DAD overhead. Thus, | |||
the IPv6 address autoconfiguration for vehicular networks needs to | the IPv6 address autoconfiguration for vehicular networks needs to | |||
consider this tradeoff to support efficient mobility management. | consider this tradeoff to support efficient mobility management. | |||
For the case of a multihomed network, a vehicle can follow the first- | ||||
hop router selection rule described in [RFC8028]. That is, the | ||||
vehicle should select its default router for each prefix by | ||||
preferring the router that advertised the prefix. | ||||
Therefore, for the proactive and seamless IPv6 mobility of vehicles, | Therefore, for the proactive and seamless IPv6 mobility of vehicles, | |||
the vehicular infrastructure (including IP-RSUs and MA) needs to | the vehicular infrastructure (including IP-RSUs and MA) needs to | |||
efficiently perform the mobility management of the vehicles with | efficiently perform the mobility management of the vehicles with | |||
their mobility information and link-layer information. Also, in | their mobility information and link-layer information. Also, in | |||
IPv6-based vehicular networking, IPv6 mobility management should have | IPv6-based vehicular networking, IPv6 mobility management should have | |||
minimum changes for the interoperability with the legacy IPv6 | minimum changes for the interoperability with the legacy IPv6 | |||
mobility management schemes such as PMIPv6, DMM, LISP, and AERO. | mobility management schemes such as PMIPv6, DMM, LISP, and AERO. | |||
6. Security Considerations | 6. Security Considerations | |||
skipping to change at page 29, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 29, line 33 ¶ | |||
IP-RSU) in an EN needs to be established, as shown in Figure 3 | IP-RSU) in an EN needs to be established, as shown in Figure 3 | |||
[RFC4301][RFC4302][RFC4303][RFC4308][RFC7296]. Also, for secure V2V | [RFC4301][RFC4302][RFC4303][RFC4308][RFC7296]. Also, for secure V2V | |||
communication, a secure channel (e.g., IPsec) between a mobile router | communication, a secure channel (e.g., IPsec) between a mobile router | |||
(i.e., IP-OBU) in a vehicle and a mobile router (i.e., IP-OBU) in | (i.e., IP-OBU) in a vehicle and a mobile router (i.e., IP-OBU) in | |||
another vehicle needs to be established, as shown in Figure 4. For | another vehicle needs to be established, as shown in Figure 4. For | |||
secure communication, an element in a vehicle (e.g., an in-vehicle | secure communication, an element in a vehicle (e.g., an in-vehicle | |||
device and a driver/passenger's mobile device) needs to establish a | device and a driver/passenger's mobile device) needs to establish a | |||
secure connection (e.g., TLS) with another element in another vehicle | secure connection (e.g., TLS) with another element in another vehicle | |||
or another element in a vehicular cloud (e.g., a server). Even | or another element in a vehicular cloud (e.g., a server). Even | |||
though IEEE 1609.2 [WAVE-1609.2] specifies security services for | though IEEE 1609.2 [WAVE-1609.2] specifies security services for | |||
applications and management messages. This WAVE specification is | applications and management messages, this WAVE specification is | |||
optional, so if WAVE does not support the security of a WAVE frame, | optional. Thus, if WAVE does not support the security of a WAVE | |||
either the network layer or the transport layer needs to support | frame, either the network layer or the transport layer needs to | |||
security services for the WAVE frames. | support security services for the WAVE frames. | |||
For the setup of a secure channel over IPsec or TLS, the multihop V2I | For the setup of a secure channel over IPsec or TLS, the multihop V2I | |||
communications over DSRC is required in a highway for the | communications over DSRC is required in a highway for the | |||
authentication by involving multiple intermediate vehicles as relay | authentication by involving multiple intermediate vehicles as relay | |||
nodes toward an IP-RSU connected to an authentication server in the | nodes toward an IP-RSU connected to an authentication server in the | |||
vehicular cloud. The V2I communications over 5G V2X (or LTE V2X) is | vehicular cloud. The V2I communications over 5G V2X (or LTE V2X) is | |||
required to allow a vehicle to communicate directly with a gNodeB (or | required to allow a vehicle to communicate directly with a gNodeB (or | |||
eNodeB) connected to an authentication server in the vehicular cloud. | eNodeB) connected to an authentication server in the vehicular cloud. | |||
To prevent an adversary from tracking a vehicle with its MAC address | To prevent an adversary from tracking a vehicle with its MAC address | |||
skipping to change at page 29, line 49 ¶ | skipping to change at page 30, line 18 ¶ | |||
pseudonym is performed without strong E2E confidentiality (using | pseudonym is performed without strong E2E confidentiality (using | |||
either IPsec or TLS), there will be no privacy benefit from changing | either IPsec or TLS), there will be no privacy benefit from changing | |||
MAC and IPv6 addresses, because an adversary can observe the change | MAC and IPv6 addresses, because an adversary can observe the change | |||
of the MAC and IPv6 addresses and track the vehicle with those | of the MAC and IPv6 addresses and track the vehicle with those | |||
addresses. Thus, the MAC address pseudonym and the IPv6 address | addresses. Thus, the MAC address pseudonym and the IPv6 address | |||
update should be performed with strong E2E confidentiality. | update should be performed with strong E2E confidentiality. | |||
For the IPv6 ND, the DAD is required to ensure the uniqueness of the | For the IPv6 ND, the DAD is required to ensure the uniqueness of the | |||
IPv6 address of a vehicle's wireless interface. This DAD can be used | IPv6 address of a vehicle's wireless interface. This DAD can be used | |||
as a flooding attack that uses the DAD-related ND packets | as a flooding attack that uses the DAD-related ND packets | |||
disseminated over the VANET or vehicular networks. Thus, the | disseminated over the VANET or vehicular networks. This possibility | |||
vehicles and IP-RSUs need to filter out suspicious ND traffic in | indicates that the vehicles and IP-RSUs need to filter out suspicious | |||
advance. | ND traffic in advance. Based on the SEND [RFC3971] mechanism, the | |||
authentication for routers (i.e., IP-RSUs) can be conducted by only | ||||
selecting an IP-RSU that has a certification path toward trusted | ||||
parties. For authenticating other vehicles, the cryptographically | ||||
generated address (CGA) can be used to verify the true owner of a | ||||
received ND message, which requires to use the CGA ND option in the | ||||
ND protocols. For a general protection of the ND mechanism, the RSA | ||||
Signature ND option can also be used to protect the integrity of the | ||||
messages by public key signatures. For a more advanced | ||||
authentication mechanism, a distributed blockchain-based mechanism | ||||
[Vehicular-BlockChain] can be used. | ||||
For mobility management, a malicious vehicle can construct multiple | For mobility management, a malicious vehicle can construct multiple | |||
virtual bogus vehicles, and register them with IP-RSUs and MA. This | virtual bogus vehicles, and register them with IP-RSUs and MA. This | |||
registration makes the IP-RSUs and MA waste their resources. The IP- | registration makes the IP-RSUs and MA waste their resources. The IP- | |||
RSUs and MA need to determine whether a vehicle is genuine or bogus | RSUs and MA need to determine whether a vehicle is genuine or bogus | |||
in mobility management. Also, the confidentiality of control packets | in mobility management. Also, the confidentiality of control packets | |||
and data packets among IP-RSUs and MA, the E2E paths (e.g., tunnels) | and data packets among IP-RSUs and MA, the E2E paths (e.g., tunnels) | |||
need to be protected by secure communication channels. In addition, | need to be protected by secure communication channels. In addition, | |||
to prevent bogus IP-RSUs and MA from interfering with the IPv6 | to prevent bogus IP-RSUs and MA from interfering with the IPv6 | |||
mobility of vehicles, mutual authentication among them needs to be | mobility of vehicles, mutual authentication among them needs to be | |||
skipping to change at page 30, line 50 ¶ | skipping to change at page 31, line 33 ¶ | |||
Networks", International Workshop on Device Centric Cloud | Networks", International Workshop on Device Centric Cloud | |||
(DC2), March 2016. | (DC2), March 2016. | |||
[CBDN] Kim, J., Kim, S., Jeong, J., Kim, H., Park, J., and T. | [CBDN] Kim, J., Kim, S., Jeong, J., Kim, H., Park, J., and T. | |||
Kim, "CBDN: Cloud-Based Drone Navigation for Efficient | Kim, "CBDN: Cloud-Based Drone Navigation for Efficient | |||
Battery Charging in Drone Networks", IEEE Transactions on | Battery Charging in Drone Networks", IEEE Transactions on | |||
Intelligent Transportation Systems, November 2019. | Intelligent Transportation Systems, November 2019. | |||
[DMM-FPC] Matsushima, S., Bertz, L., Liebsch, M., Gundavelli, S., | [DMM-FPC] Matsushima, S., Bertz, L., Liebsch, M., Gundavelli, S., | |||
Moses, D., and C. Perkins, "Protocol for Forwarding Policy | Moses, D., and C. Perkins, "Protocol for Forwarding Policy | |||
Configuration (FPC) in DMM", draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-13 | Configuration (FPC) in DMM", draft-ietf-dmm-fpc-cpdp-14 | |||
(work in progress), March 2020. | (work in progress), September 2020. | |||
[DSRC] ASTM International, "Standard Specification for | [DSRC] ASTM International, "Standard Specification for | |||
Telecommunications and Information Exchange Between | Telecommunications and Information Exchange Between | |||
Roadside and Vehicle Systems - 5 GHz Band Dedicated Short | Roadside and Vehicle Systems - 5 GHz Band Dedicated Short | |||
Range Communications (DSRC) Medium Access Control (MAC) | Range Communications (DSRC) Medium Access Control (MAC) | |||
and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications", | and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications", | |||
ASTM E2213-03(2010), October 2010. | ASTM E2213-03(2010), October 2010. | |||
[EU-2008-671-EC] | [EU-2008-671-EC] | |||
European Union, "Commission Decision of 5 August 2008 on | European Union, "Commission Decision of 5 August 2008 on | |||
skipping to change at page 31, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 32, line 24 ¶ | |||
[Fuel-Efficient] | [Fuel-Efficient] | |||
van de Hoef, S., H. Johansson, K., and D. V. Dimarogonas, | van de Hoef, S., H. Johansson, K., and D. V. Dimarogonas, | |||
"Fuel-Efficient En Route Formation of Truck Platoons", | "Fuel-Efficient En Route Formation of Truck Platoons", | |||
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, | IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, | |||
January 2018. | January 2018. | |||
[ID-Multicast-Problems] | [ID-Multicast-Problems] | |||
Perkins, C., McBride, M., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and JC. | Perkins, C., McBride, M., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and JC. | |||
Zuniga, "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless | Zuniga, "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless | |||
Media", draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-11 (work | Media", draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-13 (work | |||
in progress), December 2019. | in progress), February 2021. | |||
[Identity-Management] | [Identity-Management] | |||
Wetterwald, M., Hrizi, F., and P. Cataldi, "Cross-layer | Wetterwald, M., Hrizi, F., and P. Cataldi, "Cross-layer | |||
Identities Management in ITS Stations", The 10th | Identities Management in ITS Stations", The 10th | |||
International Conference on ITS Telecommunications, | International Conference on ITS Telecommunications, | |||
November 2010. | November 2010. | |||
[IEEE-802.11-OCB] | [IEEE-802.11-OCB] | |||
"Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and | "Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and | |||
Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications", IEEE Std | Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications", IEEE Std | |||
skipping to change at page 32, line 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 33, line 23 ¶ | |||
Networking - Amendment 1", ISO 21210:2012/AMD 1:2017, | Networking - Amendment 1", ISO 21210:2012/AMD 1:2017, | |||
September 2017. | September 2017. | |||
[NHTSA-ACAS-Report] | [NHTSA-ACAS-Report] | |||
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), | National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), | |||
"Final Report of Automotive Collision Avoidance Systems | "Final Report of Automotive Collision Avoidance Systems | |||
(ACAS) Program", DOT HS 809 080, August 2000. | (ACAS) Program", DOT HS 809 080, August 2000. | |||
[OMNI] Templin, F. and A. Whyman, "Transmission of IPv6 Packets | [OMNI] Templin, F. and A. Whyman, "Transmission of IPv6 Packets | |||
over Overlay Multilink Network (OMNI) Interfaces", draft- | over Overlay Multilink Network (OMNI) Interfaces", draft- | |||
templin-6man-omni-interface-27 (work in progress), July | templin-6man-omni-interface-97 (work in progress), March | |||
2020. | 2021. | |||
[RFC2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W., and B. Haberman, "Multicast | [RFC2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W., and B. Haberman, "Multicast | |||
Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October | Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October | |||
1999. | 1999. | |||
[RFC3753] Manner, J. and M. Kojo, "Mobility Related Terminology", | [RFC3753] Manner, J. and M. Kojo, "Mobility Related Terminology", | |||
RFC 3753, June 2004. | RFC 3753, June 2004. | |||
[RFC3810] Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery | [RFC3810] Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery | |||
Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004. | Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004. | |||
[RFC3849] Huston, G., Lord, A., and P. Smith, "IPv6 Address Prefix | [RFC3849] Huston, G., Lord, A., and P. Smith, "IPv6 Address Prefix | |||
Reserved for Documentation", RFC 3849, July 2004. | Reserved for Documentation", RFC 3849, July 2004. | |||
[RFC3971] Arkko, J., Kempf, J., Zill, B., and P. Nikander, "SEcure | ||||
Neighbor Discovery (SEND)", RFC 3971, March 2005. | ||||
[RFC4086] Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker, | [RFC4086] Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker, | |||
"Randomness Requirements for Security", RFC 4086, June | "Randomness Requirements for Security", RFC 4086, June | |||
2005. | 2005. | |||
[RFC4193] Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast | [RFC4193] Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast | |||
Addresses", RFC 4193, October 2005. | Addresses", RFC 4193, October 2005. | |||
[RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the | [RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the | |||
Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005. | Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005. | |||
skipping to change at page 34, line 14 ¶ | skipping to change at page 35, line 6 ¶ | |||
[RFC6275] Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility | [RFC6275] Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility | |||
Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011. | Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011. | |||
[RFC6550] Winter, T., Thubert, P., Brandt, A., Hui, J., Kelsey, R., | [RFC6550] Winter, T., Thubert, P., Brandt, A., Hui, J., Kelsey, R., | |||
Levis, P., Pister, K., Struik, R., Vasseur, JP., and R. | Levis, P., Pister, K., Struik, R., Vasseur, JP., and R. | |||
Alexander, "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and | Alexander, "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and | |||
Lossy Networks", RFC 6550, March 2012. | Lossy Networks", RFC 6550, March 2012. | |||
[RFC6706BIS] | [RFC6706BIS] | |||
Templin, F., "Asymmetric Extended Route Optimization | Templin, F., "Automatic Extended Route Optimization | |||
(AERO)", draft-templin-intarea-6706bis-58 (work in | (AERO)", draft-templin-intarea-6706bis-95 (work in | |||
progress), June 2020. | progress), March 2021. | |||
[RFC6830BIS] | [RFC6830BIS] | |||
Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. | Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. | |||
Cabellos, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", | Cabellos, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", | |||
draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-32 (work in progress), March | draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-36 (work in progress), November | |||
2020. | 2020. | |||
[RFC7149] Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "Software-Defined | [RFC7149] Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "Software-Defined | |||
Networking: A Perspective from within a Service Provider | Networking: A Perspective from within a Service Provider | |||
Environment", RFC 7149, March 2014. | Environment", RFC 7149, March 2014. | |||
[RFC7296] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., Eronen, P., and T. | [RFC7296] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., Eronen, P., and T. | |||
Kivinen, "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 | Kivinen, "Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 | |||
(IKEv2)", RFC 7296, October 2014. | (IKEv2)", RFC 7296, October 2014. | |||
[RFC7333] Chan, H., Liu, D., Seite, P., Yokota, H., and J. Korhonen, | [RFC7333] Chan, H., Liu, D., Seite, P., Yokota, H., and J. Korhonen, | |||
"Requirements for Distributed Mobility Management", | "Requirements for Distributed Mobility Management", | |||
RFC 7333, August 2014. | RFC 7333, August 2014. | |||
[RFC7429] Liu, D., Zuniga, JC., Seite, P., Chan, H., and CJ. | [RFC7429] Liu, D., Zuniga, JC., Seite, P., Chan, H., and CJ. | |||
Bernardos, "Distributed Mobility Management: Current | Bernardos, "Distributed Mobility Management: Current | |||
Practices and Gap Analysis", RFC 7429, January 2015. | Practices and Gap Analysis", RFC 7429, January 2015. | |||
[RFC8028] Baker, F. and B. Carpenter, "First-Hop Router Selection by | ||||
Hosts in a Multi-Prefix Network", RFC 8028, November 2016. | ||||
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 | [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 | |||
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 8200, July 2017. | (IPv6) Specification", RFC 8200, July 2017. | |||
[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol | [RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol | |||
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, August 2018. | Version 1.3", RFC 8446, August 2018. | |||
[RFC8691] Benamar, N., Haerri, J., Lee, J., and T. Ernst, "Basic | [RFC8691] Benamar, N., Haerri, J., Lee, J., and T. Ernst, "Basic | |||
Support for IPv6 Networks Operating Outside the Context of | Support for IPv6 Networks Operating Outside the Context of | |||
a Basic Service Set over IEEE Std 802.11", RFC 8691, | a Basic Service Set over IEEE Std 802.11", RFC 8691, | |||
December 2019. | December 2019. | |||
skipping to change at page 36, line 7 ¶ | skipping to change at page 36, line 50 ¶ | |||
3GPP, "Architecture Enhancements for V2X Services", 3GPP | 3GPP, "Architecture Enhancements for V2X Services", 3GPP | |||
TS 23.285/Version 16.2.0, December 2019. | TS 23.285/Version 16.2.0, December 2019. | |||
[TS-23.287-3GPP] | [TS-23.287-3GPP] | |||
3GPP, "Architecture Enhancements for 5G System (5GS) to | 3GPP, "Architecture Enhancements for 5G System (5GS) to | |||
Support Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) Services", 3GPP | Support Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) Services", 3GPP | |||
TS 23.287/Version 16.2.0, March 2020. | TS 23.287/Version 16.2.0, March 2020. | |||
[UAM-ITS] Templin, F., "Urban Air Mobility Implications for | [UAM-ITS] Templin, F., "Urban Air Mobility Implications for | |||
Intelligent Transportation Systems", draft-templin-ipwave- | Intelligent Transportation Systems", draft-templin-ipwave- | |||
uam-its-03 (work in progress), July 2020. | uam-its-04 (work in progress), January 2021. | |||
[Vehicular-BlockChain] | [Vehicular-BlockChain] | |||
Dorri, A., Steger, M., Kanhere, S., and R. Jurdak, | Dorri, A., Steger, M., Kanhere, S., and R. Jurdak, | |||
"BlockChain: A Distributed Solution to Automotive Security | "BlockChain: A Distributed Solution to Automotive Security | |||
and Privacy", IEEE Communications Magazine, Vol. 55, No. | and Privacy", IEEE Communications Magazine, Vol. 55, No. | |||
12, December 2017. | 12, December 2017. | |||
[VIP-WAVE] | [VIP-WAVE] | |||
Cespedes, S., Lu, N., and X. Shen, "VIP-WAVE: On the | Cespedes, S., Lu, N., and X. Shen, "VIP-WAVE: On the | |||
Feasibility of IP Communications in 802.11p Vehicular | Feasibility of IP Communications in 802.11p Vehicular | |||
skipping to change at page 37, line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at page 38, line 13 ¶ | |||
Operation", IEEE Std 1609.4-2016, March 2016. | Operation", IEEE Std 1609.4-2016, March 2016. | |||
Appendix A. Acknowledgments | Appendix A. Acknowledgments | |||
This work was supported by Institute of Information & Communications | This work was supported by Institute of Information & Communications | |||
Technology Planning & Evaluation (IITP) grant funded by the Korea | Technology Planning & Evaluation (IITP) grant funded by the Korea | |||
MSIT (Ministry of Science and ICT) (R-20160222-002755, Cloud based | MSIT (Ministry of Science and ICT) (R-20160222-002755, Cloud based | |||
Security Intelligence Technology Development for the Customized | Security Intelligence Technology Development for the Customized | |||
Security Service Provisioning). | Security Service Provisioning). | |||
This work was supported in part by the MSIT (Ministry of Science and | This work was supported in part by the MSIT, Korea, under the ITRC | |||
ICT), Korea, under the ITRC (Information Technology Research Center) | (Information Technology Research Center) support program (IITP- | |||
support program (IITP-2019-2017-0-01633) supervised by the IITP | 2020-2017-0-01633) supervised by the IITP. | |||
(Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion). | ||||
This work was supported in part by the French research project | This work was supported in part by the French research project | |||
DataTweet (ANR-13-INFR-0008) and in part by the HIGHTS project funded | DataTweet (ANR-13-INFR-0008) and in part by the HIGHTS project funded | |||
by the European Commission I (636537-H2020). | by the European Commission I (636537-H2020). | |||
Appendix B. Contributors | Appendix B. Contributors | |||
This document is a group work of IPWAVE working group, greatly | This document is a group work of IPWAVE working group, greatly | |||
benefiting from inputs and texts by Rex Buddenberg (Naval | benefiting from inputs and texts by Rex Buddenberg (Naval | |||
Postgraduate School), Thierry Ernst (YoGoKo), Bokor Laszlo (Budapest | Postgraduate School), Thierry Ernst (YoGoKo), Bokor Laszlo (Budapest | |||
University of Technology and Economics), Jose Santa Lozanoi | University of Technology and Economics), Jose Santa Lozanoi | |||
(Universidad of Murcia), Richard Roy (MIT), Francois Simon (Pilot), | (Universidad of Murcia), Richard Roy (MIT), Francois Simon (Pilot), | |||
Sri Gundavelli (Cisco), Erik Nordmark, Dirk von Hugo (Deutsche | Sri Gundavelli (Cisco), Erik Nordmark, Dirk von Hugo (Deutsche | |||
Telekom), Pascal Thubert (Cisco), Carlos Bernardos (UC3M), Russ | Telekom), Pascal Thubert (Cisco), Carlos Bernardos (UC3M), Russ | |||
Housley (Vigil Security), Suresh Krishnan (Kaloom), Nancy Cam-Winget | Housley (Vigil Security), Suresh Krishnan (Kaloom), Nancy Cam-Winget | |||
(Cisco), Fred L. Templin (The Boeing Company), Jung-Soo Park (ETRI), | (Cisco), Fred L. Templin (The Boeing Company), Jung-Soo Park (ETRI), | |||
Zeungil (Ben) Kim (Hyundai Motors), Kyoungjae Sun (Soongsil | Zeungil (Ben) Kim (Hyundai Motors), Kyoungjae Sun (Soongsil | |||
University), Zhiwei Yan (CNNIC), YongJoon Joe (LSware), and Peter E. | University), Zhiwei Yan (CNNIC), YongJoon Joe (LSware), Peter E. Yee | |||
Yee (Akayla). The authors sincerely appreciate their contributions. | (Akayla), and Erik Kline. The authors sincerely appreciate their | |||
contributions. | ||||
The following are co-authors of this document: | The following are co-authors of this document: | |||
Nabil Benamar | Nabil Benamar | |||
Department of Computer Sciences | Department of Computer Sciences | |||
High School of Technology of Meknes | High School of Technology of Meknes | |||
Moulay Ismail University | Moulay Ismail University | |||
Morocco | Morocco | |||
Phone: +212 6 70 83 22 36 | Phone: +212 6 70 83 22 36 | |||
skipping to change at page 39, line 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 40, line 35 ¶ | |||
Michelle Wetterwald | Michelle Wetterwald | |||
FBConsulting | FBConsulting | |||
21, Route de Luxembourg | 21, Route de Luxembourg | |||
Wasserbillig, Luxembourg L-6633 | Wasserbillig, Luxembourg L-6633 | |||
Luxembourg | Luxembourg | |||
EMail: Michelle.Wetterwald@gmail.com | EMail: Michelle.Wetterwald@gmail.com | |||
Author's Address | Author's Address | |||
Jaehoon Paul Jeong (editor) | Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong (editor) | |||
Department of Computer Science and Engineering | Department of Computer Science and Engineering | |||
Sungkyunkwan University | Sungkyunkwan University | |||
2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu | 2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu | |||
Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do 16419 | Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do 16419 | |||
Republic of Korea | Republic of Korea | |||
Phone: +82 31 299 4957 | Phone: +82 31 299 4957 | |||
Fax: +82 31 290 7996 | Fax: +82 31 290 7996 | |||
EMail: pauljeong@skku.edu | EMail: pauljeong@skku.edu | |||
URI: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php | URI: http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php | |||
End of changes. 31 change blocks. | ||||
64 lines changed or deleted | 108 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |