Internet DRAFT - draft-yan-its-nd

draft-yan-its-nd







Network Working Group                                             Z. Yan
Internet-Draft                                                     CNNIC
Intended status: Standards Track                                  J. Lee
Expires: April 28, 2017                             Sangmyung University
                                                        October 25, 2016


       Neighbor discovery to support direct communication in ITS
                        draft-yan-its-nd-01.txt

Abstract

   For C-ACC, Platooning and other typical use cases in ITS, how to
   establish direct IP communication paths between neighbor vehicles
   poses two issues : how to discover the neighbor vehicle and the
   nearby service (from the upper layer); how to discover the link-layer
   address of the selected vehicle (from the lower layer).  This draft
   aims to solve these problems based on mDNS.

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.

Status of This Memo

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

   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 April 28, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.





Yan & Lee                Expires April 28, 2017                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft               ITS Vehicle ND                 October 2016


   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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Name configuration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Address configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Neighbor discovery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Handover  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Signaling messages  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   As illustrated in [DNS-Autoconf] draft, a naming scheme is proposed
   for the vehicle devices to support the unique name auto-
   configuration.  This can be used to support the location based
   communicaton and scalable information organization in ITS.  Based on
   the naming scheme like this and the mature mDNS protocol, this draft
   illustrates how to discover the neighbor vehicle or services with the
   infrastructure-less DNS resolution.  Before this, we have the
   following assumptions:

   o  Name: vehicle SHOULD have a temporary name which is related to its
      location.

   o  Address: vehicle SHOULD have a global IP address which is stable.

   In this way, a standardized and efficient scheme can be used to
   retrieve the necessary information of the neighbor vehicles (domain
   name, IP address, goe-location and so on) for the further direct
   communications based on the mDNS function.







Yan & Lee                Expires April 28, 2017                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft               ITS Vehicle ND                 October 2016


2.  Name configuration

   The RSU acts as an access router for the static and moving vehicles
   who want to be connected.  Based on RFC3646, RFC6106 or extended WSA
   message, the RSU can announce its location based name prefix to the
   vehicles covered by it.  This location based prefix may contain
   information such as country, city, street and so on, which will act
   as the "domain_name" of the vehicle device name as spefified in the
   [DNS-Autoconf] document.

3.  Address configuration

   The RSU may advertise the IP prefix to support the SLAAC operation of
   vehicle devices and movement detection (in the IP layer).  However,
   the DHCP may also be used for the address configuration.

   The network architecture which illustrates the prefix management of
   name and address should be discussed in depth in this WG.

4.  Neighbor discovery

   o  RSU based: Vehicles may have direct connection with the serving
      RSU and join the same link-local multicast group with the serving
      RSU.  Then the RSU can maintain the registered vehicle or service
      in its serving domain.  Otherwise, the RSU acts as a relay node
      for discovering in a proxy manner.  When a vehicle wants to locate
      the potential nearby neighbor and further establish the
      communication with it, the vehicle will trigger the direct unicast
      query to port 5353 or legacy unicast DNS query to the RSU.  RSU
      may response directly if it has the related information,
      otherwise, the RSU multicasts the DNS query to multicast group to
      retrieve the related information.  Unicast response is the first
      recommendation here because it can suppress the flooding, but of
      course, the DNS response message can also be multicasted as an
      active announcement of the existence.

   o  AD-hoc based: Vehicles may communicate with each other or sense
      the front and rear neighbors with DSRC, WiFi, blue-tooth or other
      short-distance communication technologies.  When a vehicle
      discovers the neighbor vehicles through the periodic scanning, a
      L2 connection will be established.  Then they can join the same
      link-local multicast group, and the discovery can be executed in
      an infrastructure-less manner with the following phases.

   Probing: When a vehicle starts up, wakes up from stalls or topology
   changes (after configuration of the name and address), it should
   probe the availability of the service it announced.  Then the vehicle
   periodically announces the service and its existence with unsolicited



Yan & Lee                Expires April 28, 2017                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft               ITS Vehicle ND                 October 2016


   multicast DNS response containing, in the Answer Section, all of its
   service and name and address.  The vehicle also updates the related
   information actively if there is any change.

   Discovering: To support the service and neighbor vehicle discovery in
   the dynamic and fragmentation-possible environment in VANET,
   different query modes of mDNS can be used for different scenarios:

   o  One-Short Multicast DNS Query can be used to locate a specific
      service (for example).

   o  Continuous Multicast DNS Query can be used to locate the nearby
      vehicles which are moving (for example).

   Refreshing: After the neighbor discovery illustrated above, the
   vehicles should continually exchange their domain name, IP address
   and geo-location information in order to refresh the established
   communications.  For example, the Multiple Questions Multicast
   Responses can be used to update the caches of receivers efficiently
   and Multiple Questions Unicast Responses can be used to support the
   fast bootstrapping when new vehicle joins.

   Goodbye: When the vehicle arrives at its destination, stalls
   temporarily or shuts down its communication or sensing devices, it
   will announce the service suspending and its inexistence with
   unsolicited multicast DNS response packet, giving the same RRs
   (containing its name and address), but TTL of zero.

5.  Handover

   During the movement of the vehicle, it may cross different RUSes.
   When attaching into a new RSU, the new domain prefix may be learned.
   But the vehicle should keep its previous name for some time until
   that all the communicating neighbors learned its new name.  During
   this period, the vehicle will contain both previous and new domain
   names in the DNS response message.  We assume that the IP prefix is
   available in a much larger domain than the name prefix.

6.  Signaling messages

   To facilitate the further communication, the link-layer address and
   geo-information may be included in the DNS message in a piggyback
   manner.  Otherwise, these information may be obtained through the
   following NDP or other procedures.







Yan & Lee                Expires April 28, 2017                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft               ITS Vehicle ND                 October 2016


7.  Security considerations

   In order to reduce the DNS traffic on the wireless link and avoid the
   unnecessary flooding, the related schemes in mDNS can be used, such
   as: Known-Answer Suppression, Multipacket Known-Answer Suppression,
   Duplicate Question Suppression and Duplicate Answer Suppression.

   In order to guarantee the origination of the DNS message and avoid
   the DNS message tampering, the security consideration in mDNS should
   also be adopted.

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC3640]  van der Meer, J., Mackie, D., Swaminathan, V., Singer, D.,
              and P. Gentric, "RTP Payload Format for Transport of
              MPEG-4 Elementary Streams", RFC 3640,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3640, November 2003,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3640>.

   [RFC6106]  Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli,
              "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration",
              RFC 6106, DOI 10.17487/RFC6106, November 2010,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6106>.

   [RFC6762]  Cheshire, S. and M. Krochmal, "Multicast DNS", RFC 6762,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6762, February 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6762>.

8.2.  Informative References

   [DNS-Autoconf]
              Jeong, J., Lee, S., and J. Park, "DNS Name
              Autoconfiguration for Internet of Things Devices",  draft-
              jeong-its-iot-dns-autoconf-00, March 2016.

Authors' Addresses








Yan & Lee                Expires April 28, 2017                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft               ITS Vehicle ND                 October 2016


   Zhiwei Yan
   CNNIC
   No.4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun
   Beijing  100190
   China

   EMail: yan@cnnic.cn


   Jong-Hyouk Lee
   Sangmyung University
   31, Sangmyeongdae-gil, Dongnam-gu
   Cheonan
   Republic of Korea

   EMail: jonghyouk@smu.ac.kr



































Yan & Lee                Expires April 28, 2017                 [Page 6]