Subject: [geonet/its] minutes of the 'geonet' meeting in London IETF89

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:19:06 +0100

Hello,

Please see below some minutes of the 'geonet' meeting in London.

Alex

-------------------------------------------------------------------
		      'geonet' informal meeting
		      Minutes and Action Points
	      IETF89 in London Monday, 20h, in Victoria.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Participants: Melinda Shore, Eliot Lear, Dino Farinacci, Brian Rosen,
Ray Bellis, Georgios Karagiannis, Dimitri Papadimitriou, Bastiaan
Wissingh, Yong-Geun Hong, Robert Moskowitz, Alexandru Petrescu.

Sidenote: shortly after the meeting Melinda Shore announced stepping
back right after London.  We need a co-Chair.

The meeting went well, attended by about 12 people, including the
Chair of the geopriv WG.

We discussed how the Charter could be described in a clearer way, and
how it could be better scoped.
- In the first phase the Charter should be about single-hop scope.
- which level in the stack targeted at the "edges" between locator
   spaces remains open. May be a way to get out of this rathole is to
   start with a functional spec. instead of a protocol spec. Along this
   line refining the technical artefact that will be produced by this
   group would certainly help.
- add "we are not trying to reinvent layer 3 routing system".
- add "the use of these protocols will involve a "intermediary" box."
- add "This is not an automotive-only solution", although some of the
   work is applicable in vehicular communications, telematics.

Drafts on use-cases have to be written and volunteers for writing them
are about to be identified (Dino said he'd be interested).

Text is needed about re-using where applicable results of the geopriv
WG (PIDF-LO, an XML-based format).  Its potential re-use remains to be
documented in particular whether these formats could fit procedures -
actually by moving deeper into them we would also have the mean to
determine how applicable these formats are.

Use cases: determine what characterizes a good use case in the present
context before moving to their development.

The use-cases not to be pursued: identifying regions of a city issuing
particular traffic, and geolocation of instrumented ambulance.

The vehicular use cases are important, but only as an application of a
technology that is developped in a generic way.

Eliot said there is a lot of support, and if we have users that
support then we may be ok for the next steps and publish drafts before
the next IETF meeting (problem statement and use-case drafts).

Following this discussion I propose this plan of drafts.
Individual personal drafts:
- PS draft, fully describing the problem, and briefly describing the
   use-cases. (Georgios, all, including Geert Heijenk and Andreas
   Festag).
- Use-case1 draft object localization (Dimitri)
- Use-case5 draft reusing geopriv (Brian)
- Use-case2 draft goods tracking (Dino)
- Use-case3 draft geo dissemination (Georgios, Geert, Bastiaan)
- Use-case4 draft vehicular (Alex, Georgios, Robert, Geert Heijenk,
   Andreas Festag).

---

From: Dino Farinacci <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:04:48 -0700

> are about to be identified (Dino said he'd be interested).

Here is a description of the use-case I gave verbally at the ad-hoc get together. It was labeled by Alex as "the Shell case". This was a requirement from the oiler riggers in Texas.

(1) The oil companies want to track employees in the field. The conditions can be dangerous so they want to verify their safety.
(2) They are each equipped with a mobile device.
(3) The management knows their phone numbers but needs to send packets to those phone numbers. We (cisco), suggested that that register E.164 telephone numbers as EIDs in the LISP mapping database. When a lookup is performed, what is returned is an RLOC-record which contains the IP address of the mobile device.
(4) Adding geonet specific mechnanisms to this use-case, say an oil rigger explodes. They wan to send recovery instructions to all E.164 addresses in the geo radius of the explosion.
(5) So you store in the LISP mapping database the geo-coordinates of the point of explosion with say a radius value of 1 mile. All EIDs that are in the circle of geography are notified. That is each E.164 address (or IP address) of the mobile device is registered with the circle EID.
(6) Management detects explosion and sends packet to each IP address that is in the mapping database record for the circule EID as the key to the lookup.

Dino