Subject: [MEXT] About draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:02:39 +0100

I believe this morning the slides "Issues in NEMO RO for ITS"
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/09nov/slides/mext-6.pdf mentioning
draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00 were presented.  I was sleeping.

Let me now say that the draft draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00 presented in
these slides is very similar to some of our previous work
on Mobile Router to Mobile Router communications for an incident scene
scenario (NANO) http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-manemo-nano-00
in which we present how two MRs can exchange their MNPs by means of
extended Router Advertisements, and without Access Point.

We can report further implementation experience with our draft, when
necessary.

In the mean time, what were the results of the draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00
meeting presentation in Hiroshima?  Were there comments?

Thanks,

Alex

---

From: Jong-Hyouk Lee <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 14:09:00 +0100

Hi, Alexandru.

I've check the previous draft you already made in 2007. Yes, I agress
with you. The two approaches are very very similar. Actually, we have
needed to develop a mechanism to exchange the MNPs being used in
vehicles for ITS. So, we designed and implemented it. Note that
actually we're working on an ITS-related project.

I'm happy to see your previous draft. At least, it means that we
didn't take on a wrong way. I'd like to know how you're going on the
your draft. Is there any progessive?

Many thanks.

PS: Thierry presented it at the meeting and is now travelling to come
back to France. So, now he cannot get the Internet access.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Alexandru Petrescu
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> MEXT mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>

-- 
IMARA Team, INRIA, France.
Jong-Hyouk Lee.

#email: jonghyouk (at) gmail (dot) com || jong-hyouk.lee (at) inria (dot) fr
#webpage: http://hurryon.googlepages.com/

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:10:03 +0100

Jong-Hyouk Lee a écrit :
>  with you. The two approaches are very very similar. Actually, we 
> have needed to develop a mechanism to exchange the MNPs being used in

Well, yes, there is progress in the implementation of our draft.  We
have now an implementation on linux which extends radvd.  We also have a
wireshark dissector such as to show the messages properly in wireshark.

However, I am afraid our dissector will not understand the messages
developped by your draft and, worse, our Mobile Router will not
understand the messages your Mobile Router sends, because the message
formats are completely different between the two drafts (even if both
carry MNPs in RAs).

What kind of implementation do you make/use?

Alex

>>  these slides is very similar to some of our previous work on 
>> Mobile Router to Mobile Router communications for an incident scene
>>  scenario (NANO) 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-manemo-nano-00 in which 
>> we present how two MRs can exchange their MNPs by means of extended
>>  Router Advertisements, and without Access Point.
>> 
>> We can report further implementation experience with our draft, 
>> when necessary.
>> 
>> In the mean time, what were the results of the 
>> draft-jhlee-mext-mnpp-00 meeting presentation in Hiroshima?  Were 
>> there comments?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list 
>> [email-masked] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>> 
> 
> 
>

---

From: Jong-Hyouk Lee <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:17:16 +0100

Hi, Alexandru.

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 7:10 PM, Alexandru Petrescu
<[email-masked]> wrote:
>>  vehicles for ITS. So, we designed and implemented it. Note that actually
>> we're working on an ITS-related project.
>>
>> I'm happy to see your previous draft. At least, it means that we didn't
>> take on a wrong way. I'd like to know how you're going on the your draft. Is
>> there any progessive?
>

Wow. Yes, the implementation of MNPP (our implementation) is also
based on radvd. Actually, it is an extension (patch) of radvd v1.5. I
have not made the wireshark dissector, but extended radvdump also. So,
the modified radvdump can capture and provide essential information
from the modified RA message that carries the MNP being used in the
MR.

> formats are completely different between the two drafts (even if both

Yes. Because we (you and I) have different message formats. ;-)

Many thanks.

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:37:27 +0100

Jong-Hyouk Lee a écrit :
[...]
>> understand the messages your Mobile Router sends, because the
>> message formats are completely different between the two drafts
>> (even if both carry MNPs in RAs).
> 

YEs, that situation could be improved.

That is why I am wondering what has been discussed at the meeting about
the jhlee mnpp draft.

Alex

---

From: Thierry Ernst <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 17:47:04 +0100

The draft was simply presented for informational purposes. It was 
discussed if such work belongs to MEXT and one interesting discussion 
point was security. We work on securiry and next version of the draft 
will include some text about the security issues and identified ways to 
solve them using SeND and other mechanisms. Then we will seek for more 
feedback on the security aspects.

However, many people usually attending the IETF were not there, 
particularly on the last day.

Thierry