--- 1/draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-02.txt 2017-05-29 11:13:09.408392036 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-03.txt 2017-05-29 11:13:09.484393859 -0700 @@ -1,30 +1,30 @@ Network Working Group A. Petrescu Internet-Draft CEA, LIST Intended status: Standards Track N. Benamar -Expires: September 13, 2017 Moulay Ismail University +Expires: November 30, 2017 Moulay Ismail University J. Haerri Eurecom C. Huitema J. Lee Sangmyung University T. Ernst YoGoKo T. Li Peloton Technology - March 12, 2017 + May 29, 2017 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.11 Networks in mode Outside the Context of a Basic Service Set (IPv6-over-80211ocb) - draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-02.txt + draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-03.txt Abstract In order to transmit IPv6 packets on IEEE 802.11 networks run outside the context of a basic service set (OCB, earlier "802.11p") there is a need to define a few parameters such as the recommended Maximum Transmission Unit size, the header format preceding the IPv6 header, the Type value within it, and others. This document describes these parameters for IPv6 and IEEE 802.11 OCB networks; it portrays the layering of IPv6 on 802.11 OCB similarly to other known 802.11 and @@ -47,21 +47,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on September 13, 2017. + This Internet-Draft will expire on November 30, 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 @@ -72,48 +72,48 @@ described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Communication Scenarios where IEEE 802.11 OCB Links are Used 6 4. Aspects introduced by the OCB mode to 802.11 . . . . . . . . 6 5. Layering of IPv6 over 802.11-OCB as over Ethernet . . . . . . 10 5.1. Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 5.2. Frame Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 5.2.1. Ethernet Adaptation Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + 5.2. Frame Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + 5.2.1. Ethernet Adaptation Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.3. Link-Local Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 5.4. Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 5.4.1. Address Mapping -- Unicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 5.4.2. Address Mapping -- Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 5.5. Stateless Autoconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 - 5.6. Subnet Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 - 6. Example IPv6 Packet captured over a IEEE 802.11-OCB link . . 15 - 6.1. Capture in Monitor Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 6.2. Capture in Normal Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 - 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 - 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 - Appendix A. ChangeLog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 + 5.4. Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 5.4.1. Address Mapping -- Unicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 5.4.2. Address Mapping -- Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 + 5.5. Stateless Autoconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 + 5.6. Subnet Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 + 6. Example IPv6 Packet captured over a IEEE 802.11-OCB link . . 16 + 6.1. Capture in Monitor Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 6.2. Capture in Normal Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 + 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 + 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 + 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 + Appendix A. ChangeLog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Appendix B. Changes Needed on a software driver 802.11a to - become a 802.11-OCB driver . . . 27 - Appendix C. Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 - C.1. Vehicle ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 - C.2. Reliability Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 - C.3. Multiple interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 - C.4. MAC Address Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 - Appendix D. IEEE 802.11 Messages Transmitted in OCB mode . . . . 31 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 + become a 802.11-OCB driver . . . 29 + Appendix C. Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 + C.1. Vehicle ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 + C.2. Reliability Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 + C.3. Multiple interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + C.4. MAC Address Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + Appendix D. IEEE 802.11 Messages Transmitted in OCB mode . . . . 33 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 1. Introduction This document describes the transmission of IPv6 packets on IEEE Std 802.11 OCB networks (earlier known as 802.11p). This involves the layering of IPv6 networking on top of the IEEE 802.11 MAC layer (with an LLC layer). Compared to running IPv6 over the Ethernet MAC layer, there is no modification required to the standards: IPv6 works fine directly over 802.11 OCB too (with an LLC layer). @@ -125,37 +125,40 @@ Whenever OCBActivated is set to true the feature it relates to represents an earlier 802.11p feature. For example, an 802.11 STAtion operating outside the context of a basic service set has the OCBActivated flag set. Such a station, when it has the flag set, it uses a BSS identifier equal to ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff. In the following text we use the term "802.11p" to mean 802.11-2012 OCB. The IPv6 network layer operates on 802.11 OCB in the same manner as - it operates on 802.11 WiFi. The IPv6 network layer operates on WiFi - by involving an Ethernet Adaptation Layer; this Ethernet Adaptation - Layer converts between 802.11 Headers and Ethernet II headers. The - operation of IP on Ethernet is described in [RFC1042] and [RFC2464]. - The situation of IPv6 networking layer on Ethernet Adaptation Layer - is illustrated below: + it operates on 802.11 WiFi, with a few particular exceptions. The + IPv6 network layer operates on WiFi by involving an Ethernet + Adaptation Layer; this Ethernet Adaptation Layer maps 802.11 headers + to Ethernet II headers. The operation of IP on Ethernet is described + in [RFC1042] and [RFC2464]. The situation of IPv6 networking layer + on Ethernet Adaptation Layer is illustrated below: +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv6 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Ethernet Adaptation Layer | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 802.11 WiFi MAC | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 802.11 WiFi PHY | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + (in the above figure, a WiFi profile is represented; this is used + also for OCB profile.) + A more theoretical and detailed view of layer stacking, and interfaces between the IP layer and 802.11 OCB layers, is illustrated below. The IP layer operates on top of the EtherType Protocol Discrimination (EPD); this Discrimination layer is described in IEEE Std 802.3-2012; the interface between IPv6 and EPD is the LLC_SAP (Link Layer Control Service Accesss Point). +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv6 | +-+-+-+-+-+-{ }+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ @@ -164,24 +167,29 @@ | EPD | | | | | MLME | | +-+-+-{ MAC_SAP }+-+-+-| MLME_SAP | | MAC Sublayer | | | 802.11 OCB | and ch. coord. | | SME | Services +-+-+-{ PHY_SAP }+-+-+-+-+-+-+-| | | | PLME | | | PHY Layer | PLME_SAP | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + In addition to the description of interface between IP and MAC using + "Ethernet Adaptation Layer" and "Ethernet Protocol Discrimination + (EPD)" it is worth mentioning that SNAP [RFC1042] is used to carry + the IPv6 Ethertype. + However, there may be some deployment considerations helping optimize the performances of running IPv6 over 802.11-OCB (e.g. in the case of handovers between 802.11 OCB-enabled access routers, or the - consideration of using the IP security layer). + consideration of using the IP security layer [RFC4301]). There are currently no specifications for handover between OCB links since these are currently specified as LLC-1 links (i.e. connectionless). Any handovers must be performed above the Data Link Layer. Also, while there is no encryption applied below the network layer using 802.11p, 1609.2 does provide security services for applications to use so that there can easily be data security over the air without invoking IPsec. We briefly introduce the vehicular communication scenarios where IEEE @@ -218,23 +226,25 @@ In the published literature, many documents describe aspects related to running IPv6 over 802.11 OCB: [I-D.jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey]. 2. Terminology 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]. - RSU: Road Side Unit. An IP router equipped with, or connected to, at - least one interface that is 802.11 and that is an interface that - operates in OCB mode. + RSU: Road Side Unit. A computer equipped with at least one IEEE + 802.11 interface operated in OCB mode. This definition applies to + this document. An RSU may be connected to the Internet, and may be + equipped with additional wired or wireless network interfaces running + IP. An RSU MAY be an IP Router. OCB: outside the context of a basic service set (BSS): A mode of operation in which a STA is not a member of a BSS and does not utilize IEEE Std 802.11 authentication, association, or data confidentiality. 802.11-OCB, or 802.11 OCB: text in document IEEE 802.11-2012 that is flagged by "dot11OCBActivated". This means: IEEE 802.11e for quality of service; 802.11j-2004 for half-clocked operations; and (what was known earlier as) 802.11p for operation in the 5.9 GHz band and in @@ -252,21 +262,21 @@ 4. Aspects introduced by the OCB mode to 802.11 In the IEEE 802.11 OCB mode, all nodes in the wireless range can directly communicate with each other without authentication/ association procedures. Briefly, the IEEE 802.11 OCB mode has the following properties: o The use by each node of a 'wildcard' BSSID (i.e., each bit of the BSSID is set to 1) - o No Beacons transmitted + o No IEEE 802.11 Beacon frames transmitted o No authentication required o No association needed o No encryption provided o Flag dot11OCBActivated set to true The following message exchange diagram illustrates a comparison @@ -274,46 +284,46 @@ messages can be IP messages such as the messages used in Stateless or Stateful Address Auto-Configuration, or other IP messages. Other 802.11 management and control frames (non IP) may be transmitted, as specified in the 802.11 standard. For information, the names of these messages as currently specified by the 802.11 standard are listed in Appendix D. STA AP STA1 STA2 | | | | |<------ Beacon -------| |<------ Data -------->| - | | |<------ Data -------->| + | | | | |---- Probe Req. ----->| |<------ Data -------->| - |<--- Probe Res. ------| |<------ Data -------->| + |<--- Probe Res. ------| | | | | |<------ Data -------->| - |---- Auth Req. ------>| |<------ Data -------->| + |---- Auth Req. ------>| | | |<--- Auth Res. -------| |<------ Data -------->| - | | |<------ Data -------->| + | | | | |---- Asso Req. ------>| |<------ Data -------->| - |<--- Asso Res. -------| |<------ Data -------->| + |<--- Asso Res. -------| | | | | |<------ Data -------->| - |------- Data -------->| |<------ Data -------->| - |------- Data -------->| |<------ Data -------->| + |<------ Data -------->| | | + |<------ Data -------->| |<------ Data -------->| - (a) Traditional IEEE 802.11 (b) IEEE 802.11 OCB mode + (a) 802.11 Infrastructure mode (b) 802.11 OCB mode The link 802.11 OCB was specified in IEEE Std 802.11p(TM)-2010 - [ieee802.11p-2010] as an amendment to the 802.11 specifications, + [ieee802.11p-2010] as an amendment to IEEE Std 802.11 (TM) -2007, titled "Amendment 6: Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments". Since then, this amendment has been included in IEEE 802.11(TM)-2012 [ieee802.11-2012], titled "IEEE Standard for Information technology-- Telecommunications and information exchange between systems Local and metropolitan area networks--Specific requirements Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications"; the modifications are diffused throughout various sections (e.g. the Time Advertisement message described in the - earlier 802.11p ammendment is now described in section 'Frame + earlier 802.11 (TM) p amendment is now described in section 'Frame formats', and the operation outside the context of a BSS described in section 'MLME'). In document 802.11-2012, specifically anything referring "OCBActivated", or "outside the context of a basic service set" is actually referring to the 802.11p aspects introduced to 802.11. Note that in earlier 802.11p documents the term "OCBEnabled" was used instead of te current "OCBActivated". In order to delineate the aspects introduced by 802.11 OCB to 802.11, @@ -343,29 +353,31 @@ numerous changes to the MAC layer (and very little to the PHY layer), we note there are only a few characteristics which may be important for an implementation transmitting IPv6 packets on 802.11 OCB links. In the list below, the only 802.11 OCB fundamental points which influence IPv6 are the OCB operation and the 12Mbit/s maximum which may be afforded by the IPv6 applications. o Operation Outside the Context of a BSS (OCB): the (earlier 802.11p) 802.11-OCB links are operated without a Basic Service Set - (BSS). This means that the messages Beacon, Association Request/ - Response, Authentication Request/Response, and similar, are not - used. The used identifier of BSS (BSSID) has a hexadecimal value - always ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff (48 '1' bits, or the 'wildcard' BSSID), - as opposed to an arbitrary BSSID value set by administrator (e.g. - 'My-Home-AccessPoint'). The OCB operation - namely the lack of - beacon-based scanning and lack of authentication - has a - potentially strong impact on the use of the Mobile IPv6 protocol - and on the protocols for IP layer security. + (BSS). This means that the frames IEEE 802.11 Beacon, Association + Request/Response, Authentication Request/Response, and similar, + are not used. The used identifier of BSS (BSSID) has a + hexadecimal value always 0xffffffffffff (48 '1' bits, represented + as MAC address ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff, or otherwise the 'wildcard' + BSSID), as opposed to an arbitrary BSSID value set by + administrator (e.g. 'My-Home-AccessPoint'). The OCB operation - + namely the lack of beacon-based scanning and lack of + authentication - has a potentially strong impact on the use of the + Mobile IPv6 protocol [RFC6275] and on the protocols for IP layer + security [RFC4301]. o Timing Advertisement: is a new message defined in 802.11-OCB, which does not exist in 802.11a/b/g/n. This message is used by stations to inform other stations about the value of time. It is similar to the time as delivered by a GNSS system (Galileo, GPS, ...) or by a cellular system. This message is optional for implementation. At the date of writing, an experienced reviewer considers that currently no field testing has used this message. Another implementor considers this feature implemented in an initial manner. In the future, it is speculated that this message @@ -389,64 +401,73 @@ bands is exempt from owning a license in EU (in US the 5.9GHz is a licensed band of spectrum; for the the fixed infrastructure an explicit FCC autorization is required; for an onboard device a 'licensed-by-rule' concept applies: rule certification conformity is required); however technical conditions are different than those of the bands "2.4GHz" or "5GHz". On one hand, the allowed power levels, and implicitly the maximum allowed distance between vehicles, is of 33dBm for 802.11-OCB (in Europe), compared to 20 dBm for Wireless LAN 802.11a/b/g/n; this leads to a maximum distance of approximately 1km, compared to approximately 50m. On - the hand, specific conditions related to congestion avoidance, - jamming avoidance, and radar detection are imposed on the use of - DSRC (in US) and on the use of frequencies for Intelligent - Transportation Systems (in EU), compared to Wireless LAN - (802.11a/b/g/n). + the other hand, specific conditions related to congestion + avoidance, jamming avoidance, and radar detection are imposed on + the use of DSRC (in US) and on the use of frequencies for + Intelligent Transportation Systems (in EU), compared to Wireless + LAN (802.11a/b/g/n). - o Prohibition of IPv6 on some channels relevant for the PHY of IEEE - 802.11-OCB, as opposed to IPv6 not being prohibited on any channel - on which 802.11a/b/g/n runs; at the time of writing, this - prohibition is explicit in IEEE 1609 documents. + o Prohibition of IPv6 on some channels relevant for IEEE 802.11-OCB, + as opposed to IPv6 not being prohibited on any channel on which + 802.11a/b/g/n runs: + + * Some channels are reserved for safety communications; the IPv6 + packets should not be sent on these channels. + + * At the time of writing, the prohibition is explicit at higher + layer protocols providing services to the application; these + higher layer protocols are specified in IEEE 1609 documents. + + * National or regional specifications and regulations specify the + use of different channels; these regulations must be followed. o 'Half-rate' encoding: as the frequency range, this parameter is related to PHY, and thus has not much impact on the interface between the IP layer and the MAC layer. o In vehicular communications using 802.11-OCB links, there are - strong privacy concerns with respect to addressing. While the + strong privacy requirements with respect to addressing. While the 802.11-OCB standard does not specify anything in particular with respect to MAC addresses, in these settings there exists a strong need for dynamic change of these addresses (as opposed to the non- vehicular settings - real wall protection - where fixed MAC addresses do not currently pose some privacy risks). This is further described in section Section 7. A relevant function is - described in IEEE 1609.3, clause 5.5.1 and IEEE 1609.4, clause - 6.7. + described in IEEE 1609.3-2016, clause 5.5.1 and IEEE 1609.4-2016, + clause 6.7. Other aspects particular to 802.11-OCB which are also particular to 802.11 (e.g. the 'hidden node' operation) may have an influence on the use of transmission of IPv6 packets on 802.11-OCB networks. The subnet structure which may be assumed in 802.11-OCB networks is strongly influenced by the mobility of vehicles. 5. Layering of IPv6 over 802.11-OCB as over Ethernet 5.1. Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) The default MTU for IP packets on 802.11-OCB is 1500 octets. It is the same value as IPv6 packets on Ethernet links, as specified in [RFC2464]. This value of the MTU respects the recommendation that every link in the Internet must have a minimum MTU of 1280 octets (stated in [RFC2460], and the recommendations therein, especially with respect to fragmentation). If IPv6 packets of size larger than - 1500 bytes are sent on an 802.11-OCB interface then the IP stack will - fragment. In case there are IP fragments, the field "Sequence + 1500 bytes are sent on an 802.11-OCB interface card then the IP stack + will fragment. In case there are IP fragments, the field "Sequence number" of the 802.11 Data header containing the IP fragment field is increased. Non-IP packets such as WAVE Short Message Protocol (WSMP) can be delivered on 802.11-OCB links. Specifications of these packets are out of scope of this document, and do not impose any limit on the MTU size, allowing an arbitrary number of 'containers'. Non-IP packets such as ETSI 'geonet' packets have an MTU of 1492 bytes. The Equivalent Transmit Time on Channel is a concept that may be used @@ -490,83 +511,87 @@ | header | +- -+ | and | +- -+ / payload ... / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ (Each tic mark represents one bit.) Ethernet II Fields: - o Destination Ethernet Address: the MAC destination address. + Destination Ethernet Address + the MAC destination address. - o Source Ethernet Address: the MAC source address. + Source Ethernet Address + the MAC source address. - o "1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1": binary representation of the - EtherType value 0x86DD. + 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 + binary representation of the EtherType value 0x86DD. - o IPv6 header and payload: the IPv6 packet containing IPv6 header - and payload. + IPv6 header and payload + the IPv6 packet containing IPv6 header and payload. 5.2.1. Ethernet Adaptation Layer In general, an 'adaptation' layer is inserted between a MAC layer and the Networking layer. This is used to transform some parameters between their form expected by the IP stack and the form provided by the MAC layer. For example, an 802.15.4 adaptation layer may perform fragmentation and reassembly operations on a MAC whose maximum Packet Data Unit size is smaller than the minimum MTU recognized by the IPv6 Networking layer. Other examples involve link-layer address transformation, packet header insertion/removal, and so on. An Ethernet Adaptation Layer makes an 802.11 MAC look to IP Networking layer as a more traditional Ethernet layer. At reception, this layer takes as input the IEEE 802.11 Data Header and the Logical-Link Layer Control Header and produces an Ethernet II Header. At sending, the reverse operation is performed. - +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ - | 802.11 Data Header | LLC Header | IPv6 Header | Payload | - +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ - ^ + +--------------------+------------+-------------+---------+-----------+ + | 802.11 Data Header | LLC Header | IPv6 Header | Payload |.11 Trailer| + +--------------------+------------+-------------+---------+-----------+ + \ / \ / + ----------------------------- -------- + ^---------------------------------------------/ | 802.11-to-Ethernet Adaptation Layer | v - +---------------------+-------------+---------+ | Ethernet II Header | IPv6 Header | Payload | +---------------------+-------------+---------+ - The Receiver and Transmitter Address fields in the 802.11 Data Header contain the same values as the Destination and the Source Address fields in the Ethernet II Header, respectively. The value of the Type field in the LLC Header is the same as the value of the Type field in the Ethernet II Header. + The ".11 Trailer" contains solely a 4-byte Frame Check Sequence. + The Ethernet Adaptation Layer performs operations in relation to IP fragmentation and MTU. One of these operations is briefly described in section Section 5.1. In OCB mode, IPv6 packets can be transmitted either as "IEEE 802.11 Data" or alternatively as "IEEE 802.11 QoS Data", as illustrated in the following figure: - +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ - | 802.11 Data Header | LLC Header | IPv6 Header | Payload | - +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ ++--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+-----------+ +| 802.11 Data Header | LLC Header | IPv6 Header | Payload |.11 Trailer| ++--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+-----------+ or - +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ - | 802.11 QoS Data Hdr| LLC Header | IPv6 Header | Payload | - +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ ++--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+-----------+ +| 802.11 QoS Data Hdr| LLC Header | IPv6 Header | Payload |.11 Trailer| ++--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+-----------+ The distinction between the two formats is given by the value of the field "Type/Subtype". The value of the field "Type/Subtype" in the 802.11 Data header is 0x0020. The value of the field "Type/Subtype" in the 802.11 QoS header is 0x0028. The mapping between qos-related fields in the IPv6 header (e.g. "Traffic Class", "Flow label") and fields in the "802.11 QoS Data Header" (e.g. "QoS Control") are not specified in this document. Guidance for a potential mapping is provided in @@ -581,21 +606,47 @@ 5.4. Address Mapping For unicast as for multicast, there is no change from the unicast and multicast address mapping format of Ethernet interfaces, as defined by sections 6 and 7 of [RFC2464]. 5.4.1. Address Mapping -- Unicast The procedure for mapping IPv6 unicast addresses into Ethernet link- - layer addresses is described in + layer addresses is described in [RFC4861]. The Source/Target Link- + layer Address option has the following form when the link-layer is + Ethernet. + + 0 1 + 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Length | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | | + +- Ethernet -+ + | | + +- Address -+ + | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Option fields: + + Type + 1 for Source Link-layer address. + 2 for Target Link-layer address. + + Length + 1 (in units of 8 octets). + + Ethernet Address + The 48 bit Ethernet IEEE 802 address, in canonical bit order. 5.4.2. Address Mapping -- Multicast IPv6 protocols often make use of IPv6 multicast addresses in the destination field of IPv6 headers. For example, an ICMPv6 link- scoped Neighbor Advertisement is sent to the IPv6 address ff02::1 denoted "all-nodes" address. When transmitting these packets on 802.11-OCB links it is necessary to map the IPv6 address to a MAC address. @@ -642,21 +693,21 @@ the identifier should be treated as an opaque value. The bits 'Universal' and 'Group' in the identifier of an 802.11-OCB interface are significant, as this is an IEEE link-layer address. The details of this significance are described in [I-D.ietf-6man-ug]. As with all Ethernet and 802.11 interface identifiers ([RFC7721]), the identifier of an 802.11-OCB interface may involve privacy risks. A vehicle embarking an On-Board Unit whose egress interface is 802.11-OCB may expose itself to eavesdropping and subsequent correlation of data; this may reveal data considered private by the - vehicle owner; there is a risk fo being tracked; see the privacy + vehicle owner; there is a risk of being tracked; see the privacy considerations described in Appendix C. If stable Interface Identifiers are needed in order to form IPv6 addresses on 802.11-OCB links, it is recommended to follow the recommendation in [I-D.ietf-6man-default-iids]. 5.6. Subnet Structure The 802.11 networks in OCB mode may be considered as 'ad-hoc' networks. The addressing model for such networks is described in @@ -945,32 +996,33 @@ links running outside the context of a BSS (802.11-OCB links). Tim Leinmueller contributed the idea of the use of IPv6 over 802.11-OCB for distribution of certificates. Marios Makassikis, Jose Santa Lozano, Albin Severinson and Alexey Voronov provided significant feedback on the experience of using IP messages over 802.11-OCB in initial trials. Michelle Wetterwald contributed extensively the MTU discussion, - offeried the ETSI ITS perspective, and reviewed other parts of the + offered the ETSI ITS perspective, and reviewed other parts of the document. 10. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Witold Klaudel, Ryuji Wakikawa, Emmanuel Baccelli, John Kenney, John Moring, Francois Simon, Dan Romascanu, Konstantin Khait, Ralph Droms, Richard 'Dick' Roy, Ray Hunter, Tom Kurihara, Michal Sojka, Jan de Jongh, Suresh Krishnan, Dino Farinacci, Vincent Park, Jaehoon Paul Jeong, Gloria Gwynne, - Hans-Joachim Fischer, Russ Housley, Rex Buddenberg, and William - Whyte. Their valuable comments clarified certain issues and + Hans-Joachim Fischer, Russ Housley, Rex Buddenberg, Erik Nordmark, + Bob Moskowitz, Andrew (Dryden?), Georg Mayer, Dorothy Stanley and + William Whyte. Their valuable comments clarified certain issues and generally helped to improve the document. Pierre Pfister, Rostislav Lisovy, and others, wrote 802.11-OCB drivers for linux and described how. For the multicast discussion, the authors would like to thank Owen DeLong, Joe Touch, Jen Linkova, Erik Kline, Brian Haberman and participants to discussions in network working groups. The authours would like to thank participants to the Birds-of- @@ -986,47 +1038,56 @@ "Recommendation on Stable IPv6 Interface Identifiers", draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-16 (work in progress), September 2016. [I-D.ietf-6man-ug] Carpenter, B. and S. Jiang, "Significance of IPv6 Interface Identifiers", draft-ietf-6man-ug-06 (work in progress), December 2013. [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11] - Szigeti, T. and F. Baker, "DiffServ to IEEE 802.11 - Mapping", draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-01 (work in - progress), November 2016. + Szigeti, T., Henry, J., and F. Baker, "Diffserv to IEEE + 802.11 Mapping", draft-ietf-tsvwg-ieee-802-11-03 (work in + progress), May 2017. [RFC1042] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE 802 networks", STD 43, RFC 1042, DOI 10.17487/RFC1042, February 1988, . [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, DOI 10.17487/RFC2460, December 1998, . [RFC2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks", RFC 2464, DOI 10.17487/RFC2464, December 1998, . + [RFC3963] Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., and P. + Thubert, "Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol", + RFC 3963, DOI 10.17487/RFC3963, January 2005, + . + [RFC4086] Eastlake 3rd, D., Schiller, J., and S. Crocker, "Randomness Requirements for Security", BCP 106, RFC 4086, DOI 10.17487/RFC4086, June 2005, . + [RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the + Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, DOI 10.17487/RFC4301, + December 2005, . + [RFC4429] Moore, N., "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) for IPv6", RFC 4429, DOI 10.17487/RFC4429, April 2006, . [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007, . [RFC5889] Baccelli, E., Ed. and M. Townsley, Ed., "IP Addressing @@ -1081,30 +1142,31 @@ [fcc-cc-172-184] "'Memorandum Opinion and Order, Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554', FCC 06-10, Released on July 26, 2006, document FCC- 06-110A1.pdf, document freely available at URL http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/ FCC-06-110A1.pdf downloaded on June 5th, 2014.". [I-D.jeong-ipwave-vehicular-networking-survey] - Jeong, J., Cespedes, S., Benamar, N., and J. Haerri, - "Survey on IP-based Vehicular Networking for Intelligent - Transportation Systems", draft-jeong-ipwave-vehicular- - networking-survey-00 (work in progress), October 2016. + Jeong, J., 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-02 (work in progress), March + 2017. [I-D.perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802] Perkins, C., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and J. Zuniga, "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless Media", - draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802-01 (work in - progress), September 2016. + draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802-02 (work in + progress), March 2017. [I-D.petrescu-its-scenarios-reqs] Petrescu, A., Janneteau, C., Boc, M., and W. Klaudel, "Scenarios and Requirements for IP in Intelligent Transportation Systems", draft-petrescu-its-scenarios- reqs-03 (work in progress), October 2013. [ieee16094] "1609.2-2016 - IEEE Standard for Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments--Security Services for Applications @@ -1168,20 +1230,47 @@ header and certificate formats; document freely available at URL http://www.etsi.org/deliver/ etsi_ts/103000_103099/103097/01.01.01_60/ ts_103097v010101p.pdf retrieved on July 08th, 2016.". Appendix A. ChangeLog The changes are listed in reverse chronological order, most recent changes appearing at the top of the list. + From draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-02 to draft-ietf-ipwave- + ipv6-over-80211ocb-03 + + o Keep the previous text on multiple addresses, so remove talk about + MIP6, NEMOv6 and MCoA. + + o Clarified that a 'Beacon' is an IEEE 802.11 frame Beacon. + + o Clarified the figure showing Infrastructure mode and OCB mode side + by side. + + o Added a reference to the IP Security Architecture RFC. + + o Detailed the IPv6-per-channel prohibition paragraph which reflects + the discussion at the last IETF IPWAVE WG meeting. + + o Added section "Address Mapping -- Unicast". + + o Added the ".11 Trailer" to pictures of 802.11 frames. + + o Added text about SNAP carrying the Ethertype. + + o New RSU definition allowing for it be both a Router and not + necessarily a Router some times. + + o Minor textual issues. + From draft-ietf-ipwave-ipv6-over-80211ocb-01 to draft-ietf-ipwave- ipv6-over-80211ocb-02 o Replaced almost all occurences of 802.11p with 802.11-OCB, leaving only when explanation of evolution was necessary. o Shortened by removing parameter details from a paragraph in the Introduction. o Moved a reference from Normative to Informative. @@ -1354,45 +1443,40 @@ MUST disable management mechanisms requesting acknowledgements or replies. The IEEE 802.11-OCB link having a short duration time, IPv6 over IEEE 802.11-OCB MUST implement fast IPv6 mobility management mechanisms. C.3. Multiple interfaces There are considerations for 2 or more IEEE 802.11-OCB interface cards per vehicle. For each vehicle taking part in road traffic, one - IEEE 802.11-OCB interface card MUST be fully allocated for Non IP + IEEE 802.11-OCB interface card could be fully allocated for Non IP safety-critical communication. Any other IEEE 802.11-OCB may be used for other type of traffic. The mode of operation of these other wireless interfaces is not clearly defined yet. One possibility is to consider each card as an independent network interface, with a specific MAC Address and a set of IPv6 addresses. Another possibility is to consider the set of these wireless interfaces as a single network interface (not including the IEEE 802.11-OCB interface used by Non IP safety critical communications). This will require specific logic to ensure, for example, that packets meant for a vehicle in front are actually sent by the radio in the front, or that multiple copies of the same packet received by multiple interfaces are treated as a single packet. Treating each wireless interface as a separate network interface pushes such issues to the application layer. - If Mobile IPv6 with NEMO extensions is used, then the MCoA RFC5648 - technology is relevant for Mobile Routers with multiple interfaces, - deployed in vehicles. - The privacy requirements of [] imply that if these multiple interfaces are represented by many network interface, a single renumbering event SHALL cause renumbering of all these interfaces. - If one MAC changed and another stayed constant, external observers would be able to correlate old and new values, and the privacy benefits of randomization would be lost. The privacy requirements of Non IP safety-critical communications imply that if a change of pseudonyme occurs, renumbering of all other interfaces SHALL also occur. C.4. MAC Address Generation