Vehicles and pedestrians can communicate with each other via an RSU that delivers scheduling information for wireless communication to save the smartphones' battery.
Oracle RAC VIP and ARP Primer
The use cases of V2V networking include context-aware navigation for driving safety, cooperative adaptive cruise control in an urban roadway, and platooning in a highway. These three techniques will be important elements for self-driving vehicles. That is, CASD navigator displays obstables or neighboring vehicles relevant to possible collisions in real-time through V2V networking.
CASD provides vehicles with a class-based automatic safety action plan, which considers three situations, such as the Line-of-Sight unsafe, Non-Line-of-Sight unsafe and safe situations.
This action plan can be performed among vehicles through V2V networking. Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control CACC [CA-Cuise-Control] helps vehicles to adapt their speed autonomously through V2V communication among vehicles according to the mobility of their predecessor and successor vehicles in an urban roadway or a highway.
CACC can help adjacent vehicles to efficiently adjust their speed in a cascade way through V2V networking. Platooning [Truck-Platooning] allows a series of vehicles e. Trucks can use V2V communication in addition to forward sensors in order to maintain constant clearance between two consecutive vehicles at very short gaps from 3 meters to 10 meters. This platooning can maximize the throughput of vehicular traffic in a highway and reduce the gas consumption because the leading vehicle can help the following vehicles to experience less air resistance.fedor-bystrov.me/32984.php
Notes on NLB, VMware, etc « dufxanovero.ml
This section surveys vehicular network architectures based on IP along with various radio technologies, and then discusses problem statement for a vehicular network architecture for IP-based vehicular networking. Cespedes et al. IEEE However, WAVE devices may support readdressing to provide pseudonymity, so a MAC address of a vehicle may be changed or randomly generated.
When it becomes out of the communication range of an RSU, a vehicle searches for another vehicle as a packet relay by sending a relay service announcement.
When it receives this relay service announcement and is within the communication range of an RSU, another vehicle registers itself into the RSU as a relay and notifies the relay-requester vehicle of a relay maintenance announcement. Baccelli et al. Although the main focus of WAVE has been the timely delivery of safety related information, the deployment of IP-based entertainment applications is also considered. Protocols on which the operation of IPv6 relies for IP address configuration and IP-to-link-layer address translation e.
Additionally, IPv6 implementations work under certain assumptions for the link model that do not necessarily hold in WAVE. For instance, some IPv6 implementations assume symmetry in the connectivity among neighboring interfaces. However, interference and different levels of transmission power may cause unidirectional links to appear in a WAVE link model.
Also, in an IPv6 link, it is assumed that all interfaces which are configured with the same subnet prefix are on the same IP link. Hence, there is a relationship between link and prefix, besides the different scopes that are expected from the link-local and global types of IPv6 addresses. Such a relationship does not hold in a WAVE link model due to node mobility and highly dynamic topology. Instead, the addressing assignment should follow considerations for ad-hoc link models, defined in [RFC] , which are similar to the characteristics of the WAVE link model.
In terms of the supporting protocols for IPv6, such as ND, DHCP, or stateless auto-configuration, which rely largely on multicast, do not operate as expected in the case where the WAVE link model does not have the same behavior expected for multicast IPv6 traffic due to nodes' mobility and link variability. Additional challenges such as the support of pseudonimity through MAC address change along with the suitability of traditional TCP applications are discussed by the authors since those challenges require the design of appropriate solutions.
Jemaa et al. This framework deals with two phases: To this end, the authors define a distributed mechanism that allows the vehicles to configure a common multicast address: A vehicle may also be able to change the multicast address to which it is subscribed when it changes its location. This framework suggests a network selecting approach that allows IP and non-IP multicast data delivery on the sender side.
Then, to meet the challenges of multicast address auto-configuration, the authors propose a distributed geographic multicast auto-addressing mechanism for multicast groups of vehicles, and a simple multicast data delivery scheme in hybrid networks from a server to the group of moving vehicles. However, the GMAA study lacks simulations related to performance assessment.
Petrescu et al. The paper proposes to consider an IP topology in a similar way as a radio link topology, in the sense that an IP subnet would correspond to the range of 1-hop vehicular communication. The paper defines three types of vehicles: The first class corresponds to the largest set of communicating vehicles or network nodes within a vehicle , while the role of the second class is to build an IP relay between two IP-subnet and two sub-IP networks. Finally, the last class corresponds to vehicles being connected to Internet.
Consider a simplified example of a vehicular train, where LV would be in-wagon communicating nodes, REV would be inter-wagon relays, and IV would be one node e. Although no simulation-based evaluation is conducted, the initial analysis shows a long initial connection overhead, which should be alleviated once the multi-wagon remains stable. One other aspect described in their paper is to join the IP-layer relaying with radio-link channels. Accordingly, the overall interference could be controlled within each subnetwork. This approach is similar to multi-channel topology management proposals in multi-hop sensor networks, yet adapted to an IP topology.
Their paper concludes that the generally complex multi-hop IP vehicular topology could be represented by only six different topologies, which could be further analyzed and optimized. A prefix dissemination protocol is proposed for one of the topologies. Bechler et al.
The FleetNet paper is probably one of the first papers to address this aspect, and in many ways, introduces concepts that will be later used in MIPv6 or other subsequent IP mobility management schemes. Considering that vehicular networks are required to use IPv6 addresses and also the new wireless access technology ITS-G5 new at that time , one of the challenges is to bridge the two different networks i.
Another challenge is to keep the active addressing and flows while vehicles move between FGWs. Three key messages can be yet kept in mind. First, unlike the Internet, vehicles can be more prominently directly addressed than the Internet traffic, and do not have a Home Network in the traditional MIP sense. Second, IP tunneling should be avoided as much as possible over the air. Third, the protocol-based mobility induced by the physical mobility must be kept hidden to both the vehicle and the correspondent node CN. Soares et al. For delay tolerant or disruption tolerant networks, rather than building a complex VANET-IP multi-hop route, vehicles may also be used to carry packets closer to the destination or directly to the destination.
The authors claimed it to be designed to allow full freedom to select the most appropriate technology, as well as allow to use out-of-band communication for small Control plane packets and use DTN in-band for the Data plane. The paper then further describes the different layers from the Control and the Data planes. An important aspect is to separate the Control plane from the Data plane to allow a large flexibility in a Control plane to coordinate a heterogeneous radio access technology RAT Data plane.
The main focus in this document is one-hop networking between a vehicle and an RSU or between two neighboring vehicles. However, this document does not address all multi-hop networking scenarios of vehicles and RSUs. Also, the focus is on the network layer i. Figure 1 shows an architecture for V2I and V2V networking in a road network. In vehicular networks, unidirectional links exist and must be considered. The control plane must be separated from data plane.
IP tunneling should be avoided. The mobility information of a mobile device e. A vehicular network architecture may be composed of three types of vehicles in Figure 1: This section also discusses the internetworking between a vehicle's moving network and an RSU's fixed network. As shown in Figure 2 , the vehicle's moving network and the RSU's fixed network are self-contained networks having multiple subnets and having an edge router for the communication with another vehicle or RSU. The method of prefix assignment for each subnet inside the vehicle's mobile network and the RSU's fixed network is out of scope for this document.
Internetworking between two internal networks via either V2I or V2V communication requires an exchange of network prefix and other parameters. The network parameter discovery collects networking information for an IP communication between a vehicle and an RSU or between two neighboring vehicles, such as link layer, MAC layer, and IP layer information. The link layer information includes wireless link layer parameters, such as wireless media e.
The IP layer information includes the IP address and prefix of an external network interface for the internetworking with another vehicle or RSU. Once the network parameter discovery and prefix exchange operations have been performed, packets can be transmitted between the vehicle's moving network and the RSU's fixed network. DNS should be supported to enable name resolution for hosts or servers residing either in the vehicle's moving network or the RSU's fixed network.
Figure 2 shows internetworking between the vehicle's moving network and the RSU's fixed network. There exists an internal network Moving Network1 inside Vehicle1. This document addresses the internetworking between the vehicle's moving network and the RSU's fixed network in Figure 2 and the required enhancement of IPv6 protocol suite for the V2I networking.
In Figure 3 , the prefix assignment for each subnet inside each vehicle's mobile network is done through a prefix delegation protocol. Figure 3 shows internetworking between the moving networks of two neighboring vehicles.
My Blog List
There exists another internal network Moving Network2 inside Vehicle2. Vehicle1's Router1 called mobile router and Vehicle2's Router3 called mobile router use This document describes the internetworking between the moving networks of two neighboring vehicles in Figure 3 and the required enhancement of IPv6 protocol suite for the V2V networking. This section surveys standard activities for vehicular networks in standards developing organizations.
They define an architecture and a complementary standardized set of services and interfaces that collectively enable secure vehicle-to-vehicle V2V and vehicle-to-infrastructure V2I wireless communications. The reference model of a typical WAVE device includes two data plane protocol stacks sharing a common lower stack at the data link and physical layers: The Layer 2 protocol stack distinguishes between the two upper stacks by the Ethertype field.
Notes on NLB, VMware, etc
In particular, it specifies the use of two Ethertype values i. Upper layer support includes in-vehicle applications offering safety and convenience to users. IPv6 was selected over IPv4 because IPv6 is expected to be a viable protocol into the foreseeable future.
The document provides requirements for IPv6 configuration, in particular for the address setting. When present, the WRA provides information about infrastructure internetwork connectivity, allowing receiving devices to be configured to participate in the advertised IPv6 network.
The document introduces three types of virtual link, the first one providing symmetric reachability by means of stable geographically scoped boundaries and two others that can be used when the dynamic definition of the broadcast domain is required. The combination of these three types of virtual link in the same station allows running the IPv6 ND protocol including SLAAC [RFC] as well as distributing other IPv6 link-local multicast traffic and, at the same time, reaching nodes that are outside specific geographic boundaries.
The document also describes how to support bridging on top of the GN6ASL, how IPv6 packets are encapsulated in GN packets and delivered, as well as the support of IPv6 multicast and anycast traffic, and neighbor discovery. Finally, the document includes the required operations to support the change of pseudonym, e. These services are necessary to support the global reachability of ITS-S, the continuous Internet connectivity for ITS-S, and the handover functionality required to maintain such connectivity.
- Company Blog Archives - Cisco Meraki Blog Cisco Meraki Blog?
- mac black tied vs carbon.
- mac os x 10.7 3!
This functionality also allows legacy devices to effectively use an ITS-S as an access router to connect to the Internet. Essentially, this specification describes how IPv6 is configured to support ITS-S and provides the associated management functionality. The requirements apply to all types of nodes implementing IPv6: It defines the mechanisms to be used to configure the IPv6 address for static nodes as well as for mobile nodes, while maintaining reachability from the Internet.