Subject: Re: [geonet/its] mobile access routers and geoaware intermediate routers

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 17:14:23 +0100

Le 30/11/2013 05:24, Alison Chaiken a écrit :
> Henry asks: Does "mobile RSU" really mean temporary RSU that does not
> ever move while in use?
>
> There are types of position (mobile and installed) and type of roles
> (infrastructure and client, for lack of a better word).    A mobile
> unit can be a client (like a car or fishing boat or camera) or a
> mobile unit can be a data-gathering infrastructure unit (like an ITS
> platoon leader in a designated lane, or a plane that collects data
> from installed sensors in a forest).    An installed unit will be
> infrastructural if it is an RSU transceiver, a loop detector or a
> traffic light camera.   So I would say 3/4 of the boxes in the table
> are populated, unless someone can think of an installed client.

I am trying to understand...

As I read through the paragraph it does make sense.

I like 'installed', as to illustrate something being fixed.  Like in
'installed base'.

I use 'infrastructure' to also mean something fixed, and large size,
like in 'IT infrastructure'.

I wouldnt see a a mobile unit to be a data-gathering infrastructure
unit, because infrastructure were fixed.

And yes, I agree an installed unit would be 'infrastructural' (does this
word exist?) if it had a RSU part in it.

For the word 'transceiver' - any entity be it mobile or installed does
use transceivers.  The receive-only devices are hardly used with IP,
sometimes called unidirectional links, UDLR, satellite, or maybe
'asymmetric' links.

For RSU: it is a term specified at ETSI.  We may use it or invent a new one.

Personally I have a problem with the term RSU because it says it sits on
the side of the road.  But where I live, and I believe other places as
well, for the particular application 'éco-taxe' which does use multiple
802.11p, there are two kinds of fixed units: a 'borne' and a 'portique'.
  The difference between the two is that one is at the side of the road
(a true RSU) and the other is at _both sides and above_ the road.  This
latter would hardly be called road-side unit.

For simplicity in talk, I sometimes refrain completely from using any of
the RSU/OBU/CCU/AU terms and prefer Access Router, Access Point, Mobile
Router, Modem instead.  The net effect is I rarely get the message
through automotive-minded audience.

Alex

> -- Alison

---

From: "Wissingh, B.F. (Bastiaan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 14:13:21 +0000

Hi Alison,

Thank you for the further elaboration and pointing to the completed Dutch
connected car pilot, I indeed heard about it and it was an interesting
pilot. I was also able to gather the ITS World Congress “best papers” from
TNO, please find them at http://tnomedialab.nl/ietfpaperrequest/

Kind regards,
Bastiaan

Op 29-11-13 23:49 schreef Alison Chaiken <[email-masked]>:

>Wissingh, B.F. (Bastiaan)" <[email-masked]> writes:
>>we designed a RSU that is portable meaning that among other
>>things it¹s geographical position adjusts according to the location it is
>>positioned. To show why this can be useful, we implemented a Road Works
>>Warning application based on the ETSI DENM ASN.1 specification. So for
>>example when at some location among a highway there is some ongoing Road
>>Works, a surface man could take a Mobile RSU, position it on his car
>>somewhere at the Road Works and start sending Road Works Warning messages
>>with information about the Road Works.
>
>Bastiaan, this is precisely the idea I referred to before with my
>parade example.   There will undoubtedly be many reasons to deploy
>mobile RSUs, notably temporarily when permanently installed units
>fail.    The discussion touches again on the terminology aspect.    We
>wish to call these units "road-side" because they play an
>infrastructural role, and do not travel on roads while in service.
>Nonetheless, they are mobile.    I'm concerned about the term
>"road-side" in geonetworking applications, as "dock-side" and
>"tethered overhead" are other equally valid and relevant as far as
>infrastructural roles are concerned.
>
>Unfortunately "infrastructure" is yet another overloaded term in the
>current WiFi-related context.    Can we use "ad hoc" and
>"infrastructure" for the purposes of this discussion, or will doing so
>just result in more needless confusion?
>
>Bastiaan, since you are from Netherlands, might you please point to a
>reference about this recently completed Dutch connected car pilot:
>
>http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1320201
>
>Might you be able to provide download links for the two TNO "best
>papers" from ITS World Congress:
>
>http://www.itsworldcongress.jp/program/best/index.html
>
>?
>
>Best wishes,
>Alison Chaiken
>
>-- 
>Alison Chaiken                           [email-masked]
>650-279-5600                            http://{she-devel.com,
>exerciseforthereader.org}
>It's a bug that cars were invented before computers.    -- Eric Schmidt

Dit bericht kan informatie bevatten die niet voor u is bestemd. Indien u niet de geadresseerde bent of dit bericht abusievelijk aan u is toegezonden, wordt u verzocht dat aan de afzender te melden en het bericht te verwijderen. TNO aanvaardt geen aansprakelijkheid voor de inhoud van deze e-mail, de wijze waarop u deze gebruikt en voor schade, van welke aard ook, die verband houdt met risico's verbonden aan het elektronisch verzenden van berichten.

This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.