Subject: Re: [its] 802.11p and gcdc 2016

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 14:42:19 +0200

Hi Alex Voronov,

Thanks for the reply.

I am happy there is RNDITS - an open source vehicle-to-vehicle 
communication unit.

Yours,

Alex Petrescu

Le 26/04/2016 à 22:05, Alex Voronov a écrit :
> Hi All,
>
> Here is a direct link to the document compiled during the preparation of
> the GCDC2016 with the instructions to set up CTU-IIG
> drivers: http://www.gcdc.net/images/doc/REP.802.11p-on-APU1D.pdf , which
> originate from https://gist.github.com/lisovy/80dde5a792e774a706a9 .
>
> One of the students participating in GCDC, Albin, even created a website
> for the complete communication unit: http://rndits.com/
>
> So 802.11p, and even GN\BTP\ASN.1\CAM+DENM seem to work :-)
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Alex Voronov
>
>
>
> On 26 April 2016 at 13:10, Lei Chen <[email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks Alex, it is going well with GCDC2016. We have successfully
>     conducted safety and communication test at the the test site in
>     IDIADA.  We are now at the final stage of planning and the Challenge
>     will be on 28 - 29 May. There will also be one week preparation
>     workshop at Helmond, and one day congress following the challenge.
>
>     The 802.11p drivers is the one modified by CTU-IIG
>     (https://github.com/CTU-IIG). As described here
>     (https://github.com/alexvoronov/geonetworking/blob/master/HARDWARE.md)
>     with my colleague Alex, it seems 802.11p is not yet very well
>     integrated. And GCDC provides with a step by step installation guide
>     for 802.11p on ALIX APU1D running Voyage. All information can be
>     found at GCDC site (http://gcdc.net/en/).
>
>     Again, we take the opportunity to invite all ITS experts to come and
>     join the challenge. Promise it will be exciting.
>
>     BR
>     Lei
>
>>     On 26 Apr 2016, at 11:27, Alexandru Petrescu
>>     <[email-masked]
>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Lei,
>>
>>     I hope the GCDC 2016 plan is advancing well.
>>
>>     Any idea what are the 802.11p drivers people will use at this
>>     event?  Is now 802.11p integrated in the mainline kernel?
>>
>>     Yours,
>>
>>     Alex
>>
>>
>>
>>     Le 27/10/2014 18:24, Lei Chen a écrit :
>>>     Dear Alex,
>>>
>>>     Thanks very much for the detailed explanation and also the
>>>     opportunity to share with our community about GCDC 2016.
>>>
>>>     Please see the following for details.
>>>
>>>     Best regards, Lei
>>>
>>>>     On 27 Oct 2014, at 16:08, Alexandru Petrescu
>>>>     <[email-masked]
>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>     Dear Lei Chen,
>>>>
>>>>     Thank you for the reply.
>>>>
>>>>     Le 27/10/2014 14:03, Lei Chen a écrit :
>>>>>     Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>>     Just a bit self introduction, we are working on the second
>>>>>     edition of cooperative driving challenge (www.gcdc.net
>>>>>     <http://www.gcdc.net>
>>>>>     <http://www.gcdc.net>) and somehow we came across the same topics
>>>>>     here.
>>>>
>>>>     GCDC is the same organization that issued the first freely
>>>>     available 802.11p driver?
>>>
>>>     Last time, GCDC implemented 802.11p thanks to the work with Eric
>>>     Koenders. It is open-source, I hope that is the same one you are
>>>     talking about.
>>>>
>>>>>     Thanks to Alex to bring this topic up, it is very relevant for
>>>>>     the platoon applications.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Basically, like Andras and John said, V2V through DSRC will be
>>>>>     the first implementation for initial application of platooning.
>>>>>     IP will most probably be used for Day2 applications that require
>>>>>     more data communications, for example, video streaming between
>>>>>     platoon vehicles or LDM.
>>>>
>>>>     [LDM?  (light-based communications, LiFi?)]
>>>
>>>     Sorry for that,  LDM = local dynamic map. Using DSRC and based on CAM
>>>     messages, LDM is able to be constructed, but if we consider more
>>>     accurate and complex LDM for environmental perception, I would say IP
>>>     will be needed.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>     I am happy to see IP communications are considered, even that is in
>>>>     the second day.  I personally do not worry very much of being maybe
>>>>     later, because I think IP will support more applications, currently
>>>>     unspoken of.
>>>>
>>>>>     It seems ETSI does this with an adaption layer (EN302 636-6-1,
>>>>>     TS102 636-6-1) for IPv6 to work with GeoNet.
>>>>
>>>>     Yes, there is an adaptation layer for IPv6 and geonet.  It may be
>>>>     highly necessary in the initial steps of bringing IPv6 as close as
>>>>     possible to the deployment.
>>>>
>>>>     IPv6-straight-over-80211p also uses an Adaptation Layer (the
>>>>     Ethernet Adaptation Layer used by 802.11b).
>>>>
>>>>>     Anyway, GeoNet seems to be in the protocol stack for C-ITS no
>>>>>     matter what.
>>>>
>>>>     Thanks for the remark.  It is true that GeoNet of ETSI ITS is
>>>>     present there but one should distinguish the cases where it is
>>>>     absolutely necessary - something else can not do its role.  These
>>>>     cases are the communications depending extensively on location:
>>>>     geo-dissemination, etc.
>>>>
>>>
>>>     Absolutely agree! In general, for infotainment application or less
>>>     time critical applications, IP network (LTE for example) will be the
>>>     best choice. However, for time critical applications or as you said,
>>>     geo-dependent applications, GeoNet over 802.11p may be necessary, at
>>>     least for the near future applications. If we consider further with
>>>     5G, where the latency is expected to be significantly reduced, I
>>>     guess everything can be done through IP. But it is hard to draw
>>>     conclusions about it at the current stage. Anyway,I guess the
>>>     cross-layer Decentralized Congestion Control (DCC) in C-ITS should be
>>>     able to take care of this based on the QoS requirement at the
>>>     application layer and direct the traffic to appropriate transport and
>>>     access methods, at least it is supposed to do this.
>>>
>>>>>     If IPv6 is considered, then the transport layer will be TCP/UDP
>>>>>     over IPv6 over GeoNet, though I am not sure about the protocol
>>>>>     overhead. It is an interesting issue to investigate.
>>>>
>>>>     Yes, it is an issue to investigate.
>>>>
>>>>     At IETF there is a document called IPv6-over-80211p that I author.
>>>>     The ideas expressed in this document could be used in this
>>>>     investigation. The document itself lacks certain aspects that
>>>>     anyone interested could contribute.
>>>
>>>     Thanks, I am checking with the document, I would say IPv6 over
>>>     802.11p is absolutely an option and we are investigating the
>>>     possibilities. I hope we can also contribute to this topic.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>     For platooning in Day1 applications, GeoNet (BTP and GeoNet for
>>>>>     transport) over G5 maybe the most appropriate choice at the
>>>>>     current stage because of the advantages of time delay.
>>>>
>>>>     Not sure what you mean by 'time delay'?
>>>>
>>>>     If you mean latency between vehicles, then I think 802.11p gives
>>>>     better latency, in the order of tens of millseconds.
>>>>
>>>>     Or you mean that products implementing ETSI ITS GeoNet have a time
>>>>     advantage being already there?  If so then I agree with you.
>>>
>>>     Yes, it is latency. 802.11p based access generally have better
>>>     latency, and a light weight BTP&GeoNet also contributes to the
>>>     latency issue. I guess IP over 802.11p may achieve similar latency
>>>     performance, though I need to check a bit more over that. As for IPv6
>>>     over GeoNet over 802.11p, as we already mentioned, the overhead is
>>>     worth investigating further. It is also one topic we will look at.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>     We are looking at different implementations of GeoNet for
>>>>>     potential deployment in GCDC. As we work towards Day2
>>>>>     applications, IPv6 is potentially considered. INRIA has been
>>>>>     working on the implementation through CarGeo6. If you guys have
>>>>>     more information about the implementation now, it is very
>>>>>     appreciated that you share with us.
>>>>
>>>>     Sure, certainly.  I downloaded CarGeo6 and looked at the code.  I
>>>>     have the feeling that with it a car sends its position to another
>>>>     car.
>>>>
>>>>     At my place we have another implementation of exchanging IPv6
>>>>     routing information over 802.11p.  We also have an update version
>>>>     of the original 802.11p GCDC driver for most recent linux kernels
>>>>     as well as other reliability improvements.
>>>>
>>>     We are investigating CarGeo6 now. But it is very interesting you have
>>>     an update version of the 802.11p protocol. I am not sure if you
>>>     already make it open source or not. If so, it will be absolutely a
>>>     great help for us to check the possibilities of applying IPv6 over
>>>     802.11p. Could you indicate me how and where I can check and then I
>>>     can talk with my colleagues both at Viktoria and TNO for further
>>>     discussions? If we prove the performance with IP over 802.11p during
>>>     the challenge, I would say that will be a great contribution to
>>>     C-ITS, at least for some part. Thanks very much beforehand:-)
>>>
>>>>>     Also, if you know teams that want to show their implementations
>>>>>     of cooperative driving to the world, GCDC 2016 is the place to
>>>>>     go. They are free to contact us for registration or check
>>>>>     www.gcdc.net <http://www.gcdc.net> <http://www.gcdc.net> for
>>>>>     details.
>>>>
>>>>     YEs, this is a good announcement.  Please state here what are the
>>>>     participating conditions - is it free to join, what are the fees
>>>>     involved, in which country is it happening.
>>>
>>>     Thanks Alex, it is my pleasure to share with our community the
>>>     announcement.
>>>
>>>     GCDC2016, or i-GAME (www.gcdc.net <http://www.gcdc.net>) is the
>>>     second edition of GCDC
>>>     based on its success in 2011 and with the purpose to accelerate
>>>     cooperative driving through public challenge. GCDC2016 will mainly
>>>     focus on the interoperability of communications, e.g. communications
>>>     are vendor independent and teams are very welcome to implement based
>>>     on different equipments from different vendors . However, the
>>>     communications protocol will align to the latest C-ITS standards
>>>     (Release 1) and potentially will contribute to Release 2.
>>>
>>>     It is totally free to join the challenge and in addition to that,
>>>     teams will get support from organizers (TNO and TU/e from holland,
>>>     Viktoria Swedish ICT from Sweden and IDIADA from Spain). The final
>>>     challenge will be Q2 2016 at the test site in Helmond in Holland,
>>>     exactly the same test site as GCDC 2011. GCDC2016 have two challenge
>>>     scenarios and one demo scenario. Challenge scenarios include both
>>>     urban (intersection passing) and highway (platoon merge due to
>>>     roadwork). Demo scenario is about emergency vehicle passing. All
>>>     scenarios are defined to be close to reality and the implementations
>>>     are also expected to be as close-to market as possible. We want to
>>>     show the benefits of cooperative driving and also raise the awareness
>>>     from both government and public.
>>>
>>>     The call on registrations is on-going. Notice that the registration
>>>     is not binding at this stage. Teams can show interest and ask for
>>>     further information and if possible, the organizers may help to
>>>     assist to find partners. Teams are also very welcome to contribute to
>>>     the implementation of communication protocols together with us. Just
>>>     drop us emails :-)
>>>
>>>     For those who are interested, some general requirements are as
>>>     follows, •A vehicle that will be fitted with the requirements
>>>     •Minimum longitudinal automation •Interoperable V2X communication and
>>>     interaction – will be tested both remotely online and physically at
>>>     the challenge site •Drivers are in the vehicles, safety is critical
>>>     •Drivers and support crew •Budget for travel, transport and
>>>     subsistence •Taking part in preparative workshops and the rigorous
>>>     functional testing before the challenge •Be ready by Spring 2016!
>>>
>>>     In return, the teams will get •Once in a lifetime opportunity to work
>>>     with universities, OEMs and authorities to forward the state of
>>>     cooperative autonomous driving •Get in contact with world class
>>>     companies and people in this field •Collaborate at the forefront of
>>>     standardization efforts •Help your institution learn and build its
>>>     reputation •Win the challenge and eternal fame!
>>>
>>>     Just a video introduction of last time’s challenge
>>>     (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmRifLzw8iA) for those who are
>>>     interested. Teams now can register at www.gcdc.net
>>>     <http://www.gcdc.net> or contact the
>>>     following people.
>>>
>>>     For registration and team information:
>>>      [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>     (Laurens Schrijnemakers)
>>>
>>>     For project information and collaboration: [email-masked]
>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]> (Sander
>>>     Maas)
>>>
>>>     We sincerely look forward for teams from all over the world to
>>>     participate :)
>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Alex
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     Best regards, Lei
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     *Lei Chen, PhD* Senior Researcher Cooperative Systems
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     *Viktoria Swedish ICT AB* Lindholmspiren 3A SE-417 56 Göteborg,
>>>>>     Sweden Tel: +46 76 777 1449 <tel:%2B46%2076%20777%201449>
>>>>>     E-mail: [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>>     <mailto:> www.viktoria.se <http://www.viktoria.se>
>>>>>     <http://www.viktoria.se>
>>>>>
>>>>>     Part of RISE
>>>>>
>>>>>>     On 27 Oct 2014, at 12:22, Varadi , Andras (lesswire AG Ungarn)
>>>>>>     <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Dear Alex, John I agree with John, but would like to point out
>>>>>>     that I think its likely that we will need to extend EU
>>>>>>     Geonetworking (EN 302 636) to work over IP (e.g. LTE) links
>>>>>>     also. I think we will have such requirements for EU Day2 or 3
>>>>>>     (2^nd , Third generation C-ITS) (example: update our Local
>>>>>>     Dynamic Map with a new Warning message received over cellular
>>>>>>     connection (not G5/11p)) Üdvözlettel / Best regards, András
>>>>>>     Váradi Project Manager – C2X/ITS Systems
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Automotive & WLAN Group lesswire Hungary***|***Office: +36
>>>>>>     23521 667***|***Email:[email-masked] <http://lesswire.com>
>>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]> *From:*its
>>>>>>     [mailto:[email-masked]]*On Behalf Of*John Kenney
>>>>>>     *Sent:*Saturday, October 25, 2014 1:45 AM *To:*Alexandru
>>>>>>     Petrescu *Cc:[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]> *Subject:*Re:
>>>>>>     [geonet/its] FYI - ETSI ITS - work on cooperative cruise
>>>>>>     control, platooning Hi Alex, Thanks for sharing this. I think
>>>>>>     many of us in the DSRC/Cooperative ITS community consider these
>>>>>>     two applications to be a very natural fit for the technology.
>>>>>>     Furthermore, my expectation is that the applications can work
>>>>>>     well with one-hop V2V communication of the type that does not
>>>>>>     typically use IP.  So, I don't see a benefit of including IP.
>>>>>>     That doesn't mean it wouldn't work, but as you know the DSRC
>>>>>>     community generally plans to use a lighter weight protocol,
>>>>>>     WSMP, for applications that do not need IP.  I expect ETSI will
>>>>>>     think along similar lines. Best Regards, John -- John Kenney
>>>>>>     Principal Researcher Toyota InfoTechnology Center, USA 465
>>>>>>     Bernardo Avenue Mountain View, CA 94043 Tel: 650-694-4160.
>>>>>>     Mobile: 650-224-6644 On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Alexandru
>>>>>>     Petrescu <[email-masked]
>>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote: Hello
>>>>>>     geonet/itsers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     ETSI ITS group is an SDO in Europe.  They produced many
>>>>>>     standards in the past for vehicular communications, e.g. ETSI
>>>>>>     ITS geo-networking among others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     ETSI ITS recently agreed to start working on
>>>>>>     pre-standardization items called "Cooperative Cruise Control"
>>>>>>     and "Platooning".  These two applications make automobiles (and
>>>>>>     trucks) talk to each other continuously to keep speed constant.
>>>>>>     It helps relieve automobile driver stress in jam situation or
>>>>>>     reduce gas consumption by 'platooning'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Currently the focus is on requirements including communication
>>>>>>     requirements.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     In my oppinion, and this is why I forward it to this group,
>>>>>>     establishing direct IP connections between vehicles may open
>>>>>>     paths for exchanging IP data containing speed/location and
>>>>>>     trigger a control process of adapting the speed.  One already
>>>>>>     controls vehicles by sending IP data to them, from the
>>>>>>     infrastructure.  It would be a simple matter for IP experts to
>>>>>>     send that same data from other vehicle, without going to the
>>>>>>     infrastructure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Yours,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Alex
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     _______________________________________________ its mailing
>>>>>>     list [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     _______________________________________________ its mailing
>>>>>>     list [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> <mailto:[email-masked]
>>>>>>     <mailto:[email-masked]>>
>>>>>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     _______________________________________________ its mailing list
>>>>     [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>>>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>>>
>>>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     its mailing list
>     [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/its
>
>