Le 24/04/2015 21:22, Behcet Sarikaya a écrit :
I am still not convinced.
At home I have LTE.
LTE can be 3G if it is somewhat degraded and 3G is also available, so
no reason for inter technology handoff.
YEs there is reason.
At home one may prefer the cheap 802.11ac instead of 3G. The bandwith
improvement is huge.
I am also concerned on some other MN ids proposed like RFid, what is
the assumption there? Is it that the sensor node will have Mobile IP
client?
To that I say, give me a break.
Break.
But the MN-ID as RFID does not necessarily mean it runs a MIP client.
In some deployment of buses the RFID is on the passenger and the mobile
router in the bus running Mobile IP uses another MN-ID form. YEt they
authenticate to the same server, using MN-ID concept.
I think yes, MN-ID should be independent of Mobile IP, but sometimes
work together.
Alex
Behcet
Behcet
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:27 AM, Alexandru Petrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
Le 23/04/2015 19:11, Behcet Sarikaya a écrit :
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Alexandru Petrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
Le 22/04/2015 18:06, Behcet Sarikaya a écrit :
Hi Alex,
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Alexandru Petrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
Le 16/04/2015 06:58, Jouni Korhonen a écrit :
Folks,
The adoption call for this I-D has ended. There is a clear concensus
to
adopt the I-D as a working group item.
I support its adoption.
We have been working with an identifier specific to automobiles to use
to
realize access control. Identifying an entire set of IP nodes deployed
in a
vehicle is different than identifying an end-user like address@realm.
We looked for such an identifier and believe the VIN (Vehicle
Identification
Number) be a good candidate.
One would consider using one type, like type 40, to encode the VIN or
parts
of it, into an MN-ID.
The questions to the group are the following:
- is VIN considered private information? (in deployments it is private
to a certain extent, but publicly avaliable to cameras or in public
databases to another extent).
- is the MN-ID type 40 ok for it.
- is one type sufficient or should there be subtypes.
What is your model here in providing Internet access to the car?
As you may know, operators in US are deploying systems that connect
the car to their LTE network upstream and downstream is the passengers
in the car that access over Wi-Fi.
With LTE, you get mobility support which is based on fixed anchoring.
I cc'ed to Raj who works on these types of technologies.
The ID there is the IMSI. I don't think vin is used.
The model of Internet access to the cars for cars currently on market in
Europe is the same - the LTE technology is used, using the IMSI as an
identifier. However, that does not use MN-ID, is only IPv4, is not WiFi
and
does not resist to cellular generation upgrades to 5G and beyond.
I don't understand the handover scenario. I think you are mixing the
car and the passengers in the car.
LTE is available on a large geography, why should you handover the
upstream traffic to Wi-Fi?
When the car arrives home it connects to the WiFi available in home, thus
handing over from LTE. This is a sold use-case at e.g. Tesla. The WiFi
hotspot can be the one deployed in-house, in-garage, or the WiFi offered by
the electrical recharging stations.
Other manufacturers propose scenarios in which car's WiFi antenna switches
from being an in-car hotspot to being a Client to outside wifi.
Some consider 802.11p (wifi for vehicles) to be deployed along highways and
cars to perform handovers between these 802.11p access points.
Next time on highway scan for WiFi - one is surprised by the number of
hotspots driving around, even though often they use portals.
There are many commercially considered scenarios involving WiFi handovers
for cars.
Alex
Behcet
Newer models will feature IPv6 in addition to IPv4, WiFi handover from
LTE
to house's hotspot, continuous sessions, and over-the-air software update
for cheap upgradeability to future generation 5G and beyond.
In this context it is hard to imagine IMSI will be there for a long time
in
a given car, and a more permanent identifier is needed.
To Raj - is LTE considering other kinds of identifiers for access control
(other than IMSI) for vehicular environments, like V2X?
Alex
Regards,
Behcet
Yours,
Alex
- Jouni & Dapeng
4/1/2015, 8:02 AM, Jouni Korhonen kirjoitti:
Folks,
This emails starts a two week call for the I-D
draft-perkins-dmm-4283mnids-01
to confirm the aadoption s a DMM WG document. The call ends April
15th
EOB PST.
Express your support or opposition to the mailing list. During the
IETF92 meeting we got 7 voices for the adoption so at least the same
amount supporting emails should be expected.
- Jouni & Dapeng
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
