| < draft-brandt-roll-rpl-applicability-home-building-00.txt | draft-brandt-roll-rpl-applicability-home-building-01.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roll A. Brandt | Roll A. Brandt | |||
| Internet-Draft Sigma Designs | Internet-Draft Sigma Designs | |||
| Intended status: Informational E. Baccelli | Intended status: Informational E. Baccelli | |||
| Expires: October 8, 2010 INRIA | Expires: May 16, 2011 INRIA | |||
| R. Cragie | R. Cragie | |||
| Gridmerge | Gridmerge | |||
| April 6, 2010 | November 16, 2010 | |||
| Applicability Statement: The use of RPL in Building and Home | Applicability Statement: The use of RPL in Building and Home | |||
| Environments | Environments | |||
| draft-brandt-roll-rpl-applicability-home-building-00 | draft-brandt-roll-rpl-applicability-home-building-01 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| The purpose of this document is to to provide guidance in the use of | The purpose of this document is to to provide guidance in the use of | |||
| RPL to provide the features required in building or home | RPL to provide the features required in building or home | |||
| environments, two application spaces which share a substantial number | environments, two application spaces which share a substantial number | |||
| of requirements. Note that this document refers to a specific | of requirements. Note that this document refers to a specific | |||
| revision of the RPL draft, and thus, a new revision of the RPL draft | revision of the RPL draft, and thus, a new revision of the RPL draft | |||
| will likely necessitate a new revision of this document. | will likely necessitate a new revision of this document. | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 8 ¶ | |||
| 2.2.1. Broken service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.2.1. Broken service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 5. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 5. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| The purpose of this document is to to provide guidance in the use of | The purpose of this document is to to provide guidance in the use of | |||
| RPL [RPL-07] to provide the features required both by [HOME-REQ] and | RPL [RPL-15] to provide the features required both by [HOME-REQ] and | |||
| by [BUILDING-REQ] , as these two application spaces share a | by [BUILDING-REQ] , as these two application spaces share a | |||
| substantial number of requirements. Note that this document refers | substantial number of requirements. Note that this document refers | |||
| to a specific revision of the RPL draft, and thus, a new revision of | to a specific revision of the RPL draft, and thus, a new revision of | |||
| the RPL draft will likely necessitate a new revision of this | the RPL draft will likely necessitate a new revision of this | |||
| document. RPL provides multipoint-to-point (MP2P) paths from sensors | document. RPL provides multipoint-to-point (MP2P) paths from sensors | |||
| to a sink, along a DAG; an advanced tree structure for organising | to a sink, along a DAG; an advanced tree structure for organising | |||
| network nodes in a loop-free topology with backup routes and | network nodes in a loop-free topology with backup routes and | |||
| potential support for policy-based routing. The root of the DAG is | potential support for policy-based routing. The root of the DAG is | |||
| the sink, and sensors discover and maintain the DAG via the | the sink, and sensors discover and maintain the DAG via the | |||
| dissemination of DIO signaling, initiated by the root. Conversely, | dissemination of DIO signaling, initiated by the root. Conversely, | |||
| RPL provides point-to-multippoint (P2MP) paths from the root to nodes | RPL provides point-to-multippoint (P2MP) paths from the root to nodes | |||
| along the same DAG. RPL also provide point-to-point (P2P) paths from | along the same DAG. RPL also provide point-to-point (P2P) paths from | |||
| node to node, through the first ancestor along the DAG, that is | node to node, through the first ancestor along the DAG, that is | |||
| common to both source and destination nodes. Such paths are | common to both source and destination nodes. Such paths are | |||
| discovered and maintained via DAO signaling, initiated by the | discovered and maintained via DAO signaling, initiated by the | |||
| destination node. | destination node. | |||
| 2. Problem Statement | 2. Problem Statement | |||
| Several features required by [HOME-REQ] and by [BUILDING-REQ] | Several features required by [HOME-REQ] and by [BUILDING-REQ] | |||
| challenge the P2P paths provided by RPL [RPL-07]. This section | challenge the P2P paths provided by RPL [RPL-15]. This section | |||
| reviews these challenges. In some cases, a sensor may need to | reviews these challenges. In some cases, a sensor may need to | |||
| spontaneously initiate the discovery and mainten of a path towards a | spontaneously initiate the discovery and mainten of a path towards a | |||
| desired destination that is neither the root of a DAG, nor a | desired destination that is neither the root of a DAG, nor a | |||
| destination originating DAO signaling. This feature is absent from | destination originating DAO signaling. This feature is absent from | |||
| the RPL for now. Furthermore, provided P2P paths are not | the RPL for now. Furthermore, provided P2P paths are not | |||
| satisfactory in some cases because they involve too many intermediate | satisfactory in some cases because they involve too many intermediate | |||
| sensors before reaching destination, which may be an issue in terms | sensors before reaching destination, which may be an issue in terms | |||
| of energy or delay constraints. RPL does not provide a mechanism for | of energy or delay constraints. RPL does not provide a mechanism for | |||
| discovering and maintaining more efficient alternative P2P paths when | discovering and maintaining more efficient alternative P2P paths when | |||
| they are available. These deficiencies call for the specification, | they are available. These deficiencies call for the specification, | |||
| within RPL, of complementary mechanisms which will help alleviate the | within RPL, of complementary mechanisms which will help alleviate the | |||
| challenges described below. | challenges described below. | |||
| 2.1. Risk of undesired long P2P routes | 2.1. Risk of undesired long P2P routes | |||
| The DAG, being a tree structure is formed from a root. If nodes | The DAG, being a tree structure is formed from a root. If nodes | |||
| residing in different branches have a need for communicating | residing in different branches have a need for communicating | |||
| internally, DAG mechanisms provided in RPL [RPL-07] will propagate | internally, DAG mechanisms provided in RPL [RPL-15] will propagate | |||
| traffic towards the root, potentially all the way to the root, and | traffic towards the root, potentially all the way to the root, and | |||
| down along another branch. In a typical example two nodes could | down along another branch. In a typical example two nodes could | |||
| reach each other via just two router nodes but in unfortunate cases, | reach each other via just two router nodes but in unfortunate cases, | |||
| RPL [RPL-07] may send traffic three hops up and three hops down | RPL [RPL-15] may send traffic three hops up and three hops down | |||
| again. This leads to several undesired phenomena described in the | again. This leads to several undesired phenomena described in the | |||
| following sections | following sections | |||
| 2.1.1. Traffic concentration at the root | 2.1.1. Traffic concentration at the root | |||
| If many P2P data flows have to move up towards the root to get down | If many P2P data flows have to move up towards the root to get down | |||
| again in another branch there is an increased risk of congestion the | again in another branch there is an increased risk of congestion the | |||
| nearer to the root of the DAG the data flows. Due to the broadcast | nearer to the root of the DAG the data flows. Due to the broadcast | |||
| nature of RF systems any child node of the root is not just directing | nature of RF systems any child node of the root is not just directing | |||
| RF power downwards its subtree but just as much upwards towards the | RF power downwards its subtree but just as much upwards towards the | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 38 ¶ | |||
| of the DAG. In rare occasions, changed radio conditions may render | of the DAG. In rare occasions, changed radio conditions may render | |||
| routes unusable just after a destination node has returned a DAO | routes unusable just after a destination node has returned a DAO | |||
| indicating that the destination is reachable. Given enough time, the | indicating that the destination is reachable. Given enough time, the | |||
| next Trickle timer-controlled DIODAO update will eventually repair | next Trickle timer-controlled DIODAO update will eventually repair | |||
| the broken routes. In a worst-case event this is however too late. | the broken routes. In a worst-case event this is however too late. | |||
| In an apparently stable DAG, Trickle-timer dynamics may reduce the | In an apparently stable DAG, Trickle-timer dynamics may reduce the | |||
| update rate to a few times every hour. If a user issues an actuator | update rate to a few times every hour. If a user issues an actuator | |||
| command, e.g. light on in the time interval between the last DAO | command, e.g. light on in the time interval between the last DAO | |||
| message was issued the destination module and the time one of the | message was issued the destination module and the time one of the | |||
| parents sends the next DIO, the destination cannot be reached. | parents sends the next DIO, the destination cannot be reached. | |||
| Nothing in RPL [RPL-07] kicks in to restore connectivity in a | Nothing in RPL [RPL-15] kicks in to restore connectivity in a | |||
| reactive fashion. The consequence is a broken service in home and | reactive fashion. The consequence is a broken service in home and | |||
| building applications. | building applications. | |||
| 2.2.1. Broken service | 2.2.1. Broken service | |||
| Experience from the telecom industry shows that if the voice delay | Experience from the telecom industry shows that if the voice delay | |||
| exceeds 250ms users start getting confused, frustrated andor annoyed. | exceeds 250ms users start getting confused, frustrated andor annoyed. | |||
| In the same way, if the light does not turn on within the same period | In the same way, if the light does not turn on within the same period | |||
| of time, a home control user will activate the controls again, | of time, a home control user will activate the controls again, | |||
| causing a sequence of commands such as Light{on,off,off,on,off,..} or | causing a sequence of commands such as Light{on,off,off,on,off,..} or | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 23 ¶ | |||
| 4. Security Considerations | 4. Security Considerations | |||
| This document does not have to any security considerations. | This document does not have to any security considerations. | |||
| 5. Informative References | 5. Informative References | |||
| [HOME-REQ] | [HOME-REQ] | |||
| Brandt, A., Buron, J., and G. Porcu, "Home Automation | Brandt, A., Buron, J., and G. Porcu, "Home Automation | |||
| Routing Requirements in Low Power and Lossy Networks", | Routing Requirements in Low Power and Lossy Networks", | |||
| draft-ietf-roll-home-routing-reqs-11 , 2010. | RFC5826. | |||
| [BUILDING-REQ] | [BUILDING-REQ] | |||
| Martocci, J., De Mil, P., Vermeylen, W., and N. Riou, | Martocci, J., De Mil, P., Vermeylen, W., and N. Riou, | |||
| "Building Automation Routing Requirements in Low Power and | "Building Automation Routing Requirements in Low Power and | |||
| Lossy Networks", | Lossy Networks", RFC5867. | |||
| draft-ietf-roll-building-routing-reqs-09 , 2010. | ||||
| [RPL-07] Winter, T. and P. Thubert, "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for | [RPL-15] Winter, T. and P. Thubert, "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for | |||
| Low power and Lossy Networks", draft-ietf-roll-rpl-07 , | Low power and Lossy Networks", draft-ietf-roll-rpl-15 , | |||
| 2010. | 2010. | |||
| Appendix A. Acknowledgements | Appendix A. Acknowledgements | |||
| This document reflects discussions and remarks from several | This document reflects discussions and remarks from several | |||
| individuals including (in alphabetical order): Mukul Goyal, Jerry | individuals including (in alphabetical order): Mukul Goyal, Jerry | |||
| Martocci, Charles Perkins, and Zach Shelby. | Martocci, Charles Perkins, and Zach Shelby. | |||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| End of changes. 11 change blocks. | ||||
| 13 lines changed or deleted | 12 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||