Subject: Re: [ieee-ietf-coord] Coordination Gathering Needed in Prague?

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 11:14:06 +0100

One of my collaborators (RSU manufacturer) asked me in private which 
EtherType to use  other than the allocated 0x8947 for GeoNetworking, on 
which to send CAM messages from car to Road-Side Units that use empty 
GeoNetworking and BTP headers.

These are not IP messages, but are transmitted on IEEE 802.11 OCB.  They 
do contain ETSI GeoNetworking headers but these headers are empty 
because we dont trust their necessity.

We agreed to put such CAMs with empty GeoNetowrking headers present both 
on cars and on Road-Side Units, we agreed to put at a particular 5.9GHz 
channel, but we explore which EtherType to use.

Is there some 'trial' EtherType for vehicles, which would not disturb 
others, be future proof, be available immediately (in the following 
months).

I thought to suggest 0x8948 (the next after 0x8947) but I dont know.

Alex

Le 20/02/2019 à 20:53, Russ Housley a écrit :
> During the coordination call today, no one had a topic that needed a gathering in Prague.  Since some of you could not make the call, we wanted to ask the list before deciding that there was not a reason to get together.  If you know of a topic, please speak now.
> 
> Russ
>   
> _______________________________________________
> ieee-ietf-coord mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieee-ietf-coord
>

---

From: Peter Yee <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 08:29:19 -0700

Ethertype 0x8948 is already assigned (although not listed on the IANA's page for Ethertypes, which is not the definitive listing of Ethertypes).  If you have a need for an Ethertype, you should reference RFC 7042 (Section 3) and the IANA's IEEE 802 Numbers page (https://www.iana.org/assignments/ieee-802-numbers/ieee-802-numbers.xhtml)  for more information.  Donald Eastlake (primary) and Juan Carlos Zuniga (secondary) are the IANA-designated experts for Ethertypes.

		-Peter

On 3/15/19, 3:14 AM, "ieee-ietf-coord on behalf of Alexandre Petrescu" <[email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:

Alex

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 11:59:28 -0400

Of course the IEEE Registration Authority is the authoritative source
for Ethertype assignment information. See
https://standards.ieee.org/products-services/regauth/index.html It is
somewhat of a historic accident that there is an informational listing
of historic and IETF relevant Ethertypes on the IANA web
pages...Thanks,Donald=============================== Donald E.
Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 1424 Pro Shop Court, Davenport,
FL 33896 USA [email-masked]

---

From: Russ Housley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 14:22:58 -0400

Since no one raised a topic, there will not be a coordination gathering in Prague.

Russ

---

From: ROBERT GROW <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 17:13:11 -0700

Alex:

As Donald mentioned, Ethertypes (also capitalized EtherTypes) are administered by the IEEE Registration Authority (https://standards.ieee.org/products-services/regauth/ethertype/index.html <https://standards.ieee.org/products-services/regauth/ethertype/index.html>).  The referenced web page also includes a link to the Ethertype public listing.  An applicant cannot request a specific Ethertype number.  There is no experimental Ethertype expressly assigned for vehicular protocols.

IEEE Std 802 defines Experimental Ethertypes, and those can be used for protocol development, but an assignment is required for general use once the protocol is ready for deployment.  The Experimental Ethertype also includes specification of the sub typing that is now preferred in protocols.  (If sub typing is not used as explained in IEEE Std 802, an equivalent mechanism with explanation will be required to receive an assignment, as will an explanation of why subtypes of an existing assignment can’t be used for the protocol.)

—Bob Grow, Chair, IEEE Registration Authority Committee

> On Mar 15, 2019, at 8:59 AM, Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]> wrote:
>