Network Working Group                                             Z. Yan
Internet-Draft                                                     CNNIC
Intended status: Standards Track                                  J. Lee
Expires: October 28, 2016                           Sangmyung University
                                                          April 26, 2016


Requirements for Data Aggregation in Intelligent Transportation Systems
                    draft-yan-its-aggregation-00.txt

Abstract

   Considering the large-scale but small-sized information exchange in
   the vehicular information network, this draft aims to outline the
   requirements to support the data aggregation in ITS, in order to make
   the information retrieval and dissemination more efficient.

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 October 28, 2016.

Copyright Notice

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

   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



Yan & Lee               Expires October 28, 2016                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft            ITS Data Aggregation                April 2016


   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.  Data naming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Aggregation and Segregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Caching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Other issues  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   8.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   A vehicular information network aims to implement a myriad of
   applications related to vehicles, traffic information, drivers,
   passengers and pedestrians.  Then a flexible data integration and
   segregation architecture in ITS should be designed to support the
   exchange of a huge number of heterogeneous information objects in an
   efficient and scalable manner.

   The main case for data integration we discuss in this draft is:
   multiple requested information objects originated from different
   sources share some or all hops on the transmission paths.

   This draft outlines the general requirements for data integration
   from several key aspects described in the following sections.  But
   this draft does not specify the requirements in special communication
   cases, such as V2X, I2X, V2I2V and so on, the particular requirements
   under these special cases will be analyzed in the future.

2.  Data naming

   Generally, location and data type are potentially critical indexes
   for data retrieval in ITS.  Also, for configuration, management and
   maintenance, devices may need to be accessed directly by a device-
   specific identifier.  Therefore, the naming scheme needs to
   incorporate location, data type and device information, in order to
   be scalable to support trillions of information objects.





Yan & Lee               Expires October 28, 2016                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft            ITS Data Aggregation                April 2016


   o  Location-based: A critical organizing factor for vehicular sensing
      data, especially that which is to be widely shared and fused, is
      the location to which it applies.

   o  Device-based: in some cases, the data produced by the specialized
      vehicle or infrastructure device may be requested.

   o  Type-based: another critical element for naming is the type of
      data.  Namespaces will also incorporate data type designators,
      such as speed, emission, trajectory and so on.

   Then to better support the data aggregation, the name included in the
   data request message should be designed as:

   /Producer1:Producer2:...ProducerX/ Location1:Location2:...LocationY/
   Type1:Type2:...TypeZ/ end/

   [The format of the content name used in this draft only identifies
   the logic of the name structure.]

   The parsing logic is: the data objects with Type (1,2,...Z) created
   from Location (1,2,...Y) by Producer(1,2,...X) are requested
   (producer here identifies the device).

   For example, if a vehicle wants to get the traffic information in
   Street-1, Street-2 and Street-3 (without specifying the data
   producer/device), a name of the data may be:

   //Street-1:Street-2:Street-3/traffic/end/

   In most cases, the requester only cares about what information it
   wants, but does not exactly know the information source.  In other
   words, it is possible that the requester can not specify the
   destination address of the request message.  Then a service discovery
   scheme, which may make use of the information in the data name as the
   index, should be designed in ITS.

3.  Routing

   Because ITS WG aims to apply the IP technologies to the ITS, then the
   routing table and routing scope should be adaptively designed based
   on the TCP/IP stack.

   (1) Routing table

   To support different kinds of ITS communication and different
   aggregation policies, in the routing table of the router in the RSU
   and the edge router in the vehicle, there are two types of entries at



Yan & Lee               Expires October 28, 2016                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft            ITS Data Aggregation                April 2016


   least should be maintained: geo-location based and IP based routing
   entries.  The former one is based on the geographical location
   information of the routers, which is established based on the
   coordinate information exchanged between routers or through
   centralized configuration.  While the latter one is established based
   on the normal routing protocols in the TCP/IP network.

   2) Routing scope

   As in the IP network, the routing scopes also mainly include
   multicast and unicast for different communication cases.  Then
   different routers may be configured to different multicast groups (we
   mainly consider the IPv6 scenario).  And one router may also belong
   to multiple different multicast groups.  Although the data
   aggregation acts like the multicast to converge the communications,
   it is the packet-level optimization and can be applied in both
   unicast and multicast cases.

4.  Aggregation and Segregation

   Based on the naming labels and the routing information, the router
   (especially the router in RSU) will decide if the request packet
   should be split over its multiple outgoing network interfaces.
   Specially, the router should determine if the outgoing network
   interfaces for the multiple data elements are same: if so, direct
   forwarding is made based on the matched entry in the routing table;
   otherwise, the router has to split the original request packet into
   multiple new request packets according to their different outgoing
   network interfaces and send them to different next-hop routers
   accordingly with the newly generated names.  Similarly, if the data
   is sent back through the reverse path, they can be aggregated.

   As illustrated above, based on the routing table, the router decides
   if the request message should be split over their related outgoing
   network interfaces.  However, some conditions (e.g., traffic jam or
   traffic accident information should be learnt by the traffic
   administrator as soon as possible) in the vehicular information
   network change quickly and quite frequently.  As a result, the timer
   value used for the data aggregation should be carefully set.
   Different policies for setting the timer value can be used and such
   policies need to be indicated by the upper level aggregator (e.g.,
   previous-hop router) in the request message.  Generally, some of the
   request messages should be handled on a first-in-first-out basis such
   as in the emergency case; while, some of the request messages can
   only be processed until all the required information is collected
   (e.g., in the case where we retrieve the overall traffic condition
   information).  The upper level aggregator can indicate the timer
   value to the lower level ones (e.g., the next-hop router) in the



Yan & Lee               Expires October 28, 2016                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft            ITS Data Aggregation                April 2016


   request message.  But the protocol to support this notification and
   policy decision is beyond the scope of this document.

   Another key element to support the aggregation and segregation
   procedure is a pending table which maintains the original data name
   and the newly extracted data names.  This table is mainly maintained
   by the branching node on the communication path, who conducts the
   segregation operation.  In this way, the reverse operation (data
   aggregation) can be executed.

    +---+
    | V3|-----\
    +---+     |
              |
          +-----+ //Street-3/traffic/end/
          |RSU3 |------------------\
          +-----+                  |   //Street-3:Street-4/traffic/end/
                                +-----+                 +-----+
                                |RSU2 |-----------------|RSU1 |
                                +-----+                 +-----+
          +-----+                  |                       |
          |RSU4 |------------------/                       |
          +-----+ //Street-4/traffic/end/                  |
              |                                          +---+
    +---+     |                                          |V1 |
    |V4 |-----/                                          +---+
    +---+                       //Street-3:Street-4/traffic/end/


          Figure 1: Operation of the aggregation and segregation

   An example of the aggregation and segregation is shown in Figure 1.
   In this figure, Vehicle-1(V1), Vehicle-3(V3), and Vehicle-4(V4)
   connect to the Internet through RSU1, RSU3 and RSU4 respectively.
   When V1 wants to know the current traffic states of two blocks served
   by RSU3 and RSU4 to select a better path between them, it sends out
   the data request message with the data name //Street-3:Street-
   4/traffic/end/. When RSU1 receives this request message, it directly
   sends the message to RSU2 because the next hop to request all the
   data in this message comes from RSU2.  But when RSU2 receives this
   message, it will recognize that the data should be requested from two
   different outgoing interfaces directing to RSU3 and RSU4
   respectively.  Then two new names are generated through the
   information extraction from the original name.  Specially, the data
   request for the new name //Street-3/traffic/end/ is sent to RSU3 and
   the data request for the new name //Street-4/traffic/end/ is sent to
   RSU4.




Yan & Lee               Expires October 28, 2016                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft            ITS Data Aggregation                April 2016


   After retrieval of the data corresponding to the two data request
   messages, the aggregation is conducted through the reverse path based
   on the recorded states.

5.  Caching

   Cache is necessary to reduce unnecessary data transmission, thus
   improving scalability in ITS.  When the router receives a data
   request, it will check its cache firstly.  Based on the cache hit
   result, the request may be segregated when it is possible.
   Generally, two different cache tables should be maintained:

   o  Time-sensitive data cache: some data in the ITS is very time-
      sensitive, such as the traffic jam condition.  Then the timer
      should be strictly inherited from the related response message for
      the particular data.

   o  Time-insensitive data cache: for other time-insensitive data, such
      as the geo-map information, a default timer with long life-time
      should be used to serve the following requests efficiently.

6.  Other issues

   TBD

7.  Security considerations

   TBD

8.  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>.

Authors' Addresses

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

   EMail: yan@cnnic.cn






Yan & Lee               Expires October 28, 2016                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft            ITS Data Aggregation                April 2016


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

   EMail: jonghyouk@smu.ac.kr












































Yan & Lee               Expires October 28, 2016                [Page 7]