[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 draft-ietf-ipwave-problem-statement

Network Working Group                                           J. Jeong
Internet-Draft                                   Sungkyunkwan University
Intended status: Standards Track                             A. Petrescu
Expires: December 10, 2017                                     CEA, LIST
                                                                   T. Oh
                                       Rochester Institute of Technology
                                                                  D. Liu
                                                                 Alibaba
                                                              C. Perkins
                                                          Futurewei Inc.
                                                            June 8, 2017


   Problem Statement for IP Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments
                draft-jeong-ipwave-problem-statement-00

Abstract

   This document provides a problem statement for IP Wireless Access in
   Vehicular Environments (IPWAVE), that is, vehicular networks.  This
   document addresses the extension of IPv6 as the network layer
   protocol in vehicular networks.  It deals with networking issues in
   one-hop communication between a Road-Side Unit (RSU) and a vehicle,
   that is, "vehicle-to-infrastructure" (V2I) communication.  It also
   deals with one-hop communication between two neighboring vehicles,
   that is, "vehicle-to-vehicle" (V2V) communication.  Major issues
   about IPv6 in vehicular networks include neighbor discovery protocol,
   stateless address autoconfiguration, and DNS configuration for
   Internet connectivity.  When a vehicle and an RSU have an internal
   network (respectively), the document discusses internetworking issues
   between two internal networks through either V2I or V2V
   communication.  Those issues include prefix discovery, prefix
   exchange, service discovery, security, and privacy.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 10, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Requirements Language  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   5.  Internetworking between Vehicle Network and RSU Network  . . .  6
     5.1.  V2I-Based Internetworking  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     5.2.  The Use Cases of V2I-Based Internetworking . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  Internetworking between Two Vehicle Networks . . . . . . . . .  8
     6.1.  V2V-Based Internetworking  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     6.2.  The Use Cases of V2V-Based Internetworking . . . . . . . .  9
   7.  IPv6 Addressing  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   8.  Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   9.  IP Address Autoconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   10. DNS Naming Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   11. IP Mobility Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   12. Service Discovery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   13. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   14. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   15. Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   16. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     16.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
     16.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15




Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


1.  Introduction

   Recently, Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANET) have been focusing on
   intelligent services in road networks, such as driving safety,
   efficient driving, and entertainment.  For VANET, Dedicated Short-
   Range Communications (DSRC) [DSRC-WAVE] was standardized as Wireless
   Access in Vehicular Environments (WAVE) standards by IEEE.  The WAVE
   standards include IEEE 802.11p [IEEE-802.11p] for WAVE Media Access
   Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY), IEEE 1609.0 for WAVE
   architecture [WAVE-1609.0], IEEE 1609.2 for WAVE security services
   [WAVE-1609.2], IEEE 1609.3 for WAVE networking services
   [WAVE-1609.3], and IEEE 1609.4 for WAVE multi-channel operation
   [WAVE-1609.4]. 802.11p extends IEEE 802.11a [IEEE-802.11a] by
   consideration of vehicular characteristics such as a vehicle's
   velocity and collision avoidance.  IEEE 802.11p has been published as
   IEEE 802.11 Outside the Context of a Basic Service Set (OCB)
   [IEEE-802.11-OCB] in 2012.

   Now the deployment of VANET is indicated in real road environments
   along with the popularity of smart devices (e.g., smartphone and
   tablet).  Many automobile vendors (e.g., Benz, BMW, Ford, Honda, and
   Toyota) now consider automobiles as computer systems instead of
   mechanical machines, since many current vehicles are operating with
   many sensors and software.  Google has advanced self-driving vehicles
   with many special software modules and hardware devices to support
   computer-vision-based object recognition, machine-learning-based
   decision-making, and GPS navigation.

   Vehicular networking research is enabling vehicles to communicate
   with each other and infrastructure nodes in the Internet by using
   TCP/IP, IP address autoconfiguration, routing, handover, and mobility
   management [ID-VN-Survey].  IPv6 [RFC2460] is suitable for vehicular
   networks since the protocol has abundant address space and
   autoconfiguration features, and can be extended by way of new
   protocol headers.

   This document identifies issues of IPv6-based vehicle-to-
   infrastructure (V2I) networking and vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V)
   networking, such as IPv6 addressing [RFC4291], neighbor discovery
   [RFC4861], address autoconfiguration [RFC4862], and DNS naming
   service [RFC8106][RFC3646][ID-DNSNA].  This document also identifies
   issues of internetworking between two internal networks when a
   vehicle and/or an RSU have an internal network.  Those issues include
   prefix discovery, prefix exchange, and service discovery in the
   inter-connected internal networks.  In addition, the document
   analyzes the characteristics of vehicular networks to consider the
   design of V2I or V2V networking.




Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

3.  Terminology

   This document uses the terminology described in [RFC4861] and
   [RFC4862].  In addition, five new terms are defined below:

   o  Road-Side Unit (RSU): A node that has a wireless communication
      device (e.g., DSRC) to communicate with vehicles and is connected
      to the Internet as a router.  An RSU is deployed either at an
      intersection or in a road segment.

   o  On-Board Unit (OBU): A node that has a wireless communication
      device (e.g., DSRC) to communicate with other OBUs and RSUs.  An
      OBU is mounted on a vehicle.  It is assumed that a Global
      Positioning System (GPS) is included in a vehicle with an OBU for
      efficient navigation.

   o  Fixed Network: An RSU can have an internal network consisting of
      multiple subnets.  This internal network is a fixed network since
      the RSU is fixed in the road network.

   o  Moving Network: A vehicle can have an internal network consisting
      of multiple subnets.  This internal network is called a moving
      network since the vehicle is moving in the road network.

   o  Traffic Control Center (TCC): A node that maintains road
      infrastructure information (e.g., RSUs and traffic signals),
      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.  Exemplary functions of
      TCC include the management of evacuation routes, the monitoring of
      pedestrians and bike traffic, the monitoring of real-time transit
      operations, and real-time responsive traffic signal systems.
      Thus, TCC is the nerve center of most freeway management sytems
      such that data is collected, processed, and fused with other
      operational and control data, and is also synthesized to produce
      "information" distributed to stakeholders, other agencies, and
      traveling public.  TCC is called Traffic Management Center (TMC)
      in the US.





Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


4.  Overview

   This document provides a problem statement of IPv6-based V2I and V2V
   networking.  The main focus is one-hop networking between a vehicle
   and an RSU or between two neighboring vehicles.  However, this
   document does not address all multi-hop networking scenarios of
   vehicles and RSUs.  Also, the problems focus on the network layer
   (i.e., IPv6 protocol stack) rather than the MAC layer and the
   transport layer (e.g., TCP, UDP, and SCTP).

   Figure 1 shows a network configuration for V2I and V2V networking in
   a road network.  The two RSUs (RSU1 and RSU2) are deployed in the
   road network and are connected to a Vehicular Cloud through the
   Internet.  TCC is connected to the Vehicular Cloud and the two
   vehicles (Vehicle1 and Vehicle2) are wirelessly connected to RSU1,
   and the last vehicle (Vehicle3) is wirelessly connected to RSU2.
   Vehicle1 can communicate with Vehicle2 via V2V communication, and
   Vehicle2 can communicate with Vehicle3 via V2V communication.
   Vehicle1 can communicate with Vehicle3 via RSU1 and RSU2 via V2I
   communication.

                               *-------------*
                              *               *         .-------.
                             * Vehicular Cloud *<------>|  TCC  |
                              *               *         ._______.
                               *-------------*
                              ^               ^
                              |               |
                              |               |
                              v               v
                      .--------.             .--------.
                      |  RSU1  |<----------->|  RSU2  |
                      .________.             .________.
                      ^        ^                  ^
                      :        :                  :
                      :        :                  :
                      v        v                  v
              .--------.      .--------.      .--------.
              |Vehicle1|=>    |Vehicle2|=>    |Vehicle3|=>
              |        |<....>|        |<....>|        |
              .________.      .________.      .________.


      <----> Wired Link   <....> Wireless Link   => Moving Direction

       Figure 1: The Network Configuration for Vehicular Networking





Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


5.  Internetworking between Vehicle Network and RSU Network

   This section discusses the internetworking between a vehicle's moving
   network and an RSU's fixed network.

5.1.  V2I-Based Internetworking

   As shown in Figure 2, the vehicle's moving network and the RSU's
   fixed network are internal networks having multiple subnets and
   having an edge router for the communication with another vehicle or
   RSU.  The method of prefix assignment for each subnet inside the
   vehicle's mobile network and the RSU's fixed network is out of scope
   for this document.  The internetworking between two internal networks
   via either V2I or V2V communication requires an exchange of network
   prefix and other parameters.

   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, LTE D2D,
   Bluetooth, and LiFi) and a transmission power level.  The MAC layer
   information includes the MAC address of an external network interface
   for the internetworking with another vehicle or RSU.  The IP layer
   information includes the IP address and prefix of an external network
   interface for the internetworking with another vehicle or RSU.

   Once the network parameter discovery and prefix exchange operations
   are performed, unicast of packets can be supported between the
   vehicle's moving network and the RSU's fixed network.  The DNS naming
   service should be supported for the DNS name resolution for hosts or
   servers residing either in the vehicle's moving network or the RSU's
   fixed network.


















Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


                           (*)<..........>(*)
                            |              | 2001:DB8:1:1::/64
   .------------------------------.  .---------------------------------.
   |                        |     |  |     |                           |
   | .-------. .------. .-------. |  | .-------. .------. .-------.    |
   | | Host1 | |RDNSS1| |Router1| |  | |Router3| |RDNSS2| | Host3 |    |
   | ._______. .______. ._______. |  | ._______. .______. ._______.    |
   |     ^        ^         ^     |  |     ^         ^        ^        |
   |     |        |         |     |  |     |         |        |        |
   |     v        v         v     |  |     v         v        v        |
   | ---------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- |
   | 2001:DB8:10:1::/64 ^         |  |     ^ 2001:DB8:20:1::/64        |
   |                    |         |  |     |                           |
   |                    v         |  |     v                           |
   | .-------.      .-------.     |  | .-------. .-------.   .-------. |
   | | Host2 |      |Router2|     |  | |Router4| |Server1|...|ServerN| |
   | ._______.      ._______.     |  | ._______. ._______.   ._______. |
   |     ^              ^         |  |     ^         ^           ^     |
   |     |              |         |  |     |         |           |     |
   |     v              v         |  |     v         v           v     |
   | ---------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- |
   |  2001:DB8:10:2::/64          |  |       2001:DB8:20:2::/64        |
   .______________________________.  ._________________________________.
      Vehicle1 (Moving Network1)            RSU1 (Fixed Network1)

      <----> Wired Link   <....> Wireless Link   (*) Antenna

     Figure 2: Internetworking between Vehicle Network and RSU Network

   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
   (RDNSS1), 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 (RDNSS2), 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 and RSU1's Router3 use 2001:DB8:1:1::/64 for an
   external link (e.g., DSRC) for I2V networking.

   This document addresses the internetworking between the vehicle's
   moving network and the RSU's fixed network in Figure 2 and the
   required enhancement of IPv6 protocol suite for the V2I networking
   service.






Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


5.2.  The Use Cases of V2I-Based Internetworking

   The use cases for V2I networking include navigation service, fuel-
   efficient speed recommendation service, and accident notification
   service.

   A navigation service, such as Self-Adaptive Interactive Navigation
   Tool [SAINT], using V2I networking interacts with TCC for the global
   road traffic optimization and can guide individual vehicles for
   appropriate navigation paths in real time.

   A pedestrian protection service, such as Safety-Aware Navigation
   Application [SANA], using V2I networking can reduce the collision of
   a pedestrian and a vehicle, which have a smartphone, in a road
   network.

6.  Internetworking between Two Vehicle Networks

   This section discusses the internetworking between the moving
   networks of two neighboring vehicles.

6.1.  V2V-Based Internetworking

   In Figure 3, the prefix assignment for each subnet inside each
   vehicle's mobile network is done through a prefix delegation
   protocol.

























Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


                           (*)<..........>(*)
                            |              | 2001:DB8:1:1::/64
   .------------------------------.  .---------------------------------.
   |                        |     |  |     |                           |
   | .-------. .------. .-------. |  | .-------. .------. .-------.    |
   | | Host1 | |RDNSS1| |Router1| |  | |Router3| |RDNSS2| | Host3 |    |
   | ._______. .______. ._______. |  | ._______. .______. ._______.    |
   |     ^        ^         ^     |  |     ^         ^        ^        |
   |     |        |         |     |  |     |         |        |        |
   |     v        v         v     |  |     v         v        v        |
   | ---------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- |
   | 2001:DB8:10:1::/64 ^         |  |     ^ 2001:DB8:30:1::/64        |
   |                    |         |  |     |                           |
   |                    v         |  |     v                           |
   | .-------.      .-------.     |  | .-------.      .-------.        |
   | | Host2 |      |Router2|     |  | |Router4|      | Host4 |        |
   | ._______.      ._______.     |  | ._______.      ._______.        |
   |     ^              ^         |  |     ^              ^            |
   |     |              |         |  |     |              |            |
   |     v              v         |  |     v              v            |
   | ---------------------------- |  | ------------------------------- |
   |  2001:DB8:10:2::/64          |  |       2001:DB8:30:2::/64        |
   .______________________________.  ._________________________________.
      Vehicle1 (Moving Network1)        Vehicle2 (Moving Network2)

      <----> Wired Link   <....> Wireless Link   (*) Antenna

          Figure 3: Internetworking between Two Vehicle Networks

   Figure 3 shows internetworking between the moving networks of two
   neighboring vehicles.  There exists an internal network (Moving
   Network1) inside Vehicle1.  Vehicle1 has the DNS Server (RDNSS1), 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 (RDNSS2), the two hosts
   (Host3 and Host4), and the two routers (Router3 and Router4).
   Vehicle1's Router1 and Vehicle2's Router3 use 2001:DB8:1:1::/64 for
   an external link (e.g., DSRC) for V2V networking.

   This document describes the internetworking between the moving
   networks of two neighboring vehicles in Figure 3 and the required
   enhancement of IPv6 protocol suite for the V2V networking service.

6.2.  The Use Cases of V2V-Based Internetworking

   The use cases for V2V networking include context-aware navigator for
   driving safety, cooperative adaptive cruise control in an urban
   roadway, and platooning in a highway.  These are three techniques



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


   that will be important elements for self-driving.

   Context-aware navigator can help drivers to drive safely by letting
   the drivers recognize dangerous obstacles and situations, including
   neighboring vehicles that might cause a collision [CASD].

   Cooperative adaptive cruise control helps vehicles to adapt their
   speed autonomously according to the mobility of their predecessor and
   successor vehicles in an urban roadway.

   Platooning allows a series of vehicles (e.g., trucks) to move
   together with a very short inter-distance.  This platooning can
   maximize the throughput of vehicular traffic in a highway.

7.  IPv6 Addressing

   This section discusses IP addressing for the V2I and V2V networking.
   There are two approaches for IPv6 addressing in vehicular networks.
   The first is to use unique local IPv6 unicast addresses (ULAs) for
   vehicular networks [RFC4193].  The other is to use global IPv6
   addresses for the interoperability with the Internet [RFC4291].  The
   former approach is often used by Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET) for
   an isolated subnet.  This approach can support the emergency
   notification service and navigation service in road networks.
   However, for general Internet services (e.g., email access, web
   surfing and entertainment services), the latter approach is required.

   For global IP addresses, there are two choices: a multi-link subnet
   approach for multiple RSUs and a single subnet approach per RSU.  In
   the multi-link subnet approach, which is similar to ULA for MANET,
   RSUs play a role of layer-2 (L2) switches and the router
   interconnected with the RSUs is required.  The router maintains the
   location of each vehicle belonging to an RSU for L2 switching.  In
   the single subnet approach per RSU, which is similar to the legacy
   subnet in the Internet, each RSU plays the role of a (layer-3)
   router.

8.  Neighbor Discovery

   Neighbor Discovery (ND) is a core part of IPv6 protocol suite
   [RFC4861].  This section discusses an extension of ND for V2I
   networking.  The vehicles are moving fast within the communication
   coverage of an RSU.  The external link between the vehicle and the
   RSU can be used for V2I networking, as shown in Figure 2.

   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



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


   interval should decrease for the NA messages to reach the neighboring
   vehicles promptly.  Also, as vehicle density is higher, the NA
   interval should increase for the NA messages to collide with other NA
   messages with lower collision probability.

9.  IP Address Autoconfiguration

   This section discusses IP address autoconfiguration for V2I
   networking.  For IP address autoconfiguration, high-speed vehicles
   should also be considered.  The legacy IPv6 stateless address
   autoconfiguration [RFC4862], as shown in Figure 1, may not perform
   well.  This is because vehicles can travel through the communication
   coverage of the RSU faster than the completion of address
   autoconfiguration (with Router Advertisement and Duplicate Address
   Detection (DAD) procedures).

   To mitigate the impact of vehicle speed on address configuration, the
   RSU can perform IP address autoconfiguration including the DAD
   proactively as an ND proxy on behalf of the vehicles.  If vehicles
   periodically report their movement information (e.g., position,
   trajectory, speed, and direction) to TCC, TCC can coordinate the RSUs
   under its control for the proactive IP address configuration of the
   vehicles with the mobility information of the vehicles.  DHCPv6 (or
   Stateless DHCPv6) can be used for the IP address autoconfiguration
   [RFC3315][RFC3736].

   In the case of a single subnet per RSU, the delay to change IPv6
   address through DHCPv6 procedure is not suitable since vehicles move
   fast.  Some modifications are required for the high-speed vehicles
   that quickly crosses the communication coverages of multiple RSUs.
   Some modifications are required for both stateless address
   autoconfiguration and DHCPv6.  Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6) can be used for
   the fast update of a vehicle's care-of address for the current RSU to
   communicate with the vehicle [RFC6275].

10.  DNS Naming Service

   This section suggests a DNS naming service for V2I networking.  The
   DNS naming service consists of the DNS name resolution and DNS name
   autoconfiguration.

   The DNS name resolution translates a DNS name into the corresponding
   IPv6 address through a recursive DNS server (RDNSS) within the
   vehicle's moving network and DNS servers in the Internet
   [RFC1034][RFC1035], which are located outside the VANET.  The RDNSSes
   can be advertised by RA DNS Option or DHCP DNS Option into the
   subnets within the vehicle's moving network.




Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


   The DNS name autoconfiguration makes a unique DNS name for hosts
   within a vehicle's moving network and registers it into a DNS server
   within the vehicle's moving network [ID-DNSNA].  With Vehicle
   Identification Number (VIN), a unique DNS suffix can be constructed
   as a DNS domain for the vehicle's moving network.  Each host can
   generate its DNS name and register it into the local RDNSS in the
   vehicle's moving network.

11.  IP Mobility Management

   This section discusses an IP mobility support in V2I networking.  In
   a single subnet per RSU, vehicles continually cross the communication
   coverages of adjacent RSUs.  During this crossing, TCP/UDP sessions
   can be maintained through IP mobility support, such as MIPv6
   [RFC6275], Proxy MIPv6 [RFC5213][RFC5949], and Distributed Mobility
   Management (DMM) [RFC7333][RFC7429].  Since vehicles move fast along
   roadways, high speed should be enabled by the parameter configuration
   in the IP mobility management.  With the periodic reports of the
   movement information from the vehicles, TCC can coordinate RSUs and
   other network compoments under its control for the proactive mobility
   management of the vehicles along the movement of the vehicles.

   To support the mobility of a vehicle's moving network, Network
   Mobility Basic Support Protocol (NEMO) can be used [RFC3963].  Like
   MIPv6, the high speed of vehicles should be considered for a
   parameter configuration in NEMO.

12.  Service Discovery

   Vehicles need to discover services (e.g., road condition
   notification, navigation service, and entertainment) provided by
   infrastructure nodes in a fixed network via RSU, as shown in
   Figure 2.  During the passing of an intersection or road segment with
   an RSU, vehicles should perform this service discovery quickly.

   Since with the existing service discovery protocols, such as DNS-
   based Service Discovery (DNS-SD) [RFC6763] and Multicast DNS (mDNS)
   [RFC6762], the service discovery will be performed with message
   exchanges, the discovery delay may hinder the prompt service usage of
   the vehicles from the fixed network via RSU.  One feasible approach
   is a piggyback service discovery during the prefix exchange of
   network prefixes for the networking between a vehicle's moving
   network and an RSU's fixed network.  That is, the message of the
   prefix exchange can include service information, such as each
   service's IP address, transport layer protocol, and port number.

   IPv6 ND can be extended for the prefix and service discovery
   [ID-Vehicular-ND].  Vehicles and RSUs can announce the network



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


   prefixes and services in their internal network via ND messages
   containing ND options with the prefix and service information.  Since
   it does not need any additional service discovery protocol in the
   application layer, this ND-based approach can provide vehicles and
   RSUs with the rapid discovery of the network prefixes and services.

13.  Security Considerations

   Security and privacy are paramount in the V2I and V2V networking in
   VANET.  Only authorized vehicles should be allowed to use the V2I and
   V2V networking in VANET.  A Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) and a
   user certificate along with in-vehicle device's identifier generation
   can be used to authenticate a vehicle and the user through a road
   infrastructure node, such as an RSU connected to an authentication
   server in TCC.  Transport Layer Security (TLS) certificates can also
   be used for secure vehicle communications.

   A security scheme providing authentication and access control should
   be provided in vehicular networks [VN-Security].  With this scheme,
   the security and privacy can be supported for safe and reliable data
   services in vehicular networks.

   To prevent an adversary from tracking a vehicle by with its MAC
   address or IPv6 address, 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 communications between a vehicle and an RSU.

   To protect packets exchanged between a vehicle and an RSU, packets
   should be encrypted.  To assure confidentiality, efficient encryption
   and decryption algorithms can be used along with a key management
   scheme such as Internet Key Exchange version 2 (IKEv2) and Internet
   Protocol Security (IPsec) [Securing-VCOMM].

14.  Contributors

   IPWAVE is a group effort.  The following people actively contributed
   to the problem statement text: Nabil Benamar (Moulay Ismail
   University), Sandra Cespedes (Universidad de Chile), Thierry Ernst
   (YoGoKo), Jerome Haerri (Eurecom), Richard Roy (MIT), and Francois
   Simon (Pilot).

15.  Acknowledgments

   This work was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the
   National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of
   Education (No. 2017R1B1A1B03035885).  This work was supported in part
   by ICT R&D program of MSIP/IITP (14-824-09-013, Resilient Cyber-



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


   Physical Systems Research) and the DGIST Research and Development
   Program (CPS Global Center) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT &
   Future Planning.

16.  References

16.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]          Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to
                      Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
                      March 1997.

   [RFC2460]          Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol,
                      Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460,
                      December 1998.

   [RFC4193]          Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6
                      Unicast Addresses", RFC 4193, October 2005.

   [RFC4291]          Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6
                      Addressing Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.

   [RFC4861]          Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H.
                      Soliman, "Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6
                      (IPv6)", RFC 4861, September 2007.

   [RFC4862]          Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6
                      Stateless Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862,
                      September 2007.

   [RFC8106]          Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S.
                      Madanapalli, "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options
                      for DNS Configuration", RFC 8106, March 2017.

   [RFC3646]          Droms, R., Ed., "DNS Configuration options for
                      Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6
                      (DHCPv6)", RFC 3646, December 2003.

   [RFC3315]          Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T.,
                      Perkins, C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host
                      Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)",
                      RFC 3315, July 2003.

   [RFC3736]          Droms, R., "Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration
                      Protocol (DHCP) Service for IPv6", RFC 3736,
                      April 2004.

   [RFC6275]          Perkins, C., Ed., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko,



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


                      "Mobility Support in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.

   [RFC5213]          Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V.,
                      Chowdhury, K., and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6",
                      RFC 5213, August 2008.

   [RFC5949]          Yokota, H., Chowdhury, K., Koodli, R., Patil, B.,
                      and F. Xia, "Fast Handovers for Proxy Mobile
                      IPv6", RFC 5949, September 2010.

   [RFC3963]          Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., and
                      P. Thubert, "Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support
                      Protocol", RFC 3963, January 2005.

   [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.

   [RFC1034]          Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Concepts and
                      Facilities", RFC 1034, November 1987.

   [RFC1035]          Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation
                      and Specification", RFC 1035, November 1987.

   [RFC6763]          Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "DNS-Based Service
                      Discovery", RFC 6763, February 2013.

   [RFC6762]          Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Multicast DNS",
                      RFC 6762, February 2013.

16.2.  Informative References

   [DSRC-WAVE]        Morgan, Y., "Notes on DSRC & WAVE Standards Suite:
                      Its Architecture, Design, and Characteristics",
                      IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 12(4),
                      2012.

   [IEEE-802.11p]     IEEE Std 802.11p, "Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium
                      Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)
                      Specifications Amendment 6: Wireless Access in
                      Vehicular Environments", June 2010.

   [IEEE-802.11a]     IEEE Std 802.11a, "Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


                      Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)
                      specifications: High-speed Physical Layer in the 5
                      GHZ Band", September 1999.

   [IEEE-802.11-OCB]  IEEE Std 802.11, "Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium
                      Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)
                      Specifications", February 2012.

   [WAVE-1609.0]      IEEE 1609 Working Group, "IEEE Guide for Wireless
                      Access in Vehicular Environments (WAVE) -
                      Architecture", IEEE Std 1609.0-2013, March 2014.

   [WAVE-1609.2]      IEEE 1609.2 Working Group, "IEEE Standard for
                      Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments -
                      Security Services for Applications and Management
                      Messages", IEEE Std 1609.2-2016, March 2016.

   [WAVE-1609.3]      IEEE 1609.3 Working Group, "IEEE Standard for
                      Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (WAVE) -
                      Networking Services", IEEE Std 1609.3-2016,
                      April 2016.

   [WAVE-1609.4]      IEEE 1609.4 Working Group, "IEEE Standard for
                      Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments (WAVE) -
                      Multi-Channel Operation", IEEE Std 1609.4-2016,
                      March 2016.

   [ID-VN-Survey]     Jeong, J., Ed., Cespedes, S., Benamar, N., Haerri,
                      J., and M. Wetterwald, "Survey on IP-based
                      Vehicular Networking for Intelligent
                      Transportation Systems",
                      draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey-03
                      (work in progress), June 2017.

   [ID-DNSNA]         Jeong, J., Ed., Lee, S., and J. Park, "DNS Name
                      Autoconfiguration for Internet of Things Devices",
                      draft-jeong-ipwave-iot-dns-autoconf-00 (work in
                      progress), March 2017.

   [ID-Vehicular-ND]  Jeong, J., Ed., Shen, Y., Jo, Y., Jeong, J., and
                      J. Lee, "IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for Prefix and
                      Service Discovery in Vehicular Networks",
                      draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular-neighbor-discovery-00
                      (work in progress), March 2017.

   [VN-Security]      Moustafa, H., Bourdon, G., and Y. Gourhant,
                      "Providing Authentication and Access Control in
                      Vehicular Network Environment", IFIP TC-



Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


                      11 International Information Security Conference,
                      May 2006.

   [Securing-VCOMM]   Fernandez, P., Santa, J., Bernal, F., and A.
                      Skarmeta, "Securing Vehicular IPv6
                      Communications", IEEE Transactions on Dependable
                      and Secure Computing, January 2016.

   [RFC4086]          Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker,
                      "Randomness Requirements for Security", RFC 4086,
                      June 2005.

   [RFC4941]          Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
                      Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
                      in IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007.

   [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.

   [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.

   [CASD]             Shen, Y., Jeong, J., Oh, T., and S. Son, "CASD: A
                      Framework of Context-Awareness Safety Driving in
                      Vehicular Networks", International Workshop on
                      Device Centric Cloud (DC2), March 2016.

Authors' Addresses

   Jaehoon Paul Jeong
   Department of Software
   Sungkyunkwan University
   2066 Seobu-Ro, Jangan-Gu
   Suwon, Gyeonggi-Do  440-746
   Republic of Korea

   Phone: +82 31 299 4957
   Fax:   +82 31 290 7996
   EMail: pauljeong@skku.edu
   URI:   http://iotlab.skku.edu/people-jaehoon-jeong.php






Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 17]


Internet-Draft          IPWAVE Problem Statement               June 2017


   Alex
   CEA, LIST
   CEA Saclay
   Gif-sur-Yvette, Ile-de-France  91190
   France

   Phone: +33169089223
   EMail: Alexandre.Petrescu@cea.fr


   Tae (Tom) Oh
   Department of Information Sciences and Technologies
   Rochester Institute of Technology
   One Lomb Memorial Drive
   Rochester, NY  14623-5603
   USA

   Phone: +1 585 475 7642
   EMail: Tom.Oh@rit.edu


   Dapeng Liu
   Alibaba
   Beijing, Beijing  100022
   China

   Phone: +86 13911788933
   EMail: max.ldp@alibaba-inc.com


   Charles E. Perkins
   Futurewei Inc.
   2330 Central Expressway
   Santa Clara, CA  95050
   USA

   Phone: +1 408 330 4586
   EMail: charliep@computer.org













Jeong, et al.           Expires December 10, 2017              [Page 18]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.123, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/