| < draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-02.txt | draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-03.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6man WG S. Chakrabarti | 6man WG S. Chakrabarti | |||
| Internet-Draft Ericsson | Internet-Draft Ericsson | |||
| Updates: 4861 (if approved) E. Nordmark | Updates: 4861 (if approved) E. Nordmark | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track P. Thubert | Intended status: Standards Track | |||
| Expires: January 16, 2014 Cisco Systems | Expires: April 18, 2014 P. Thubert | |||
| Cisco Systems | ||||
| M. Wasserman | M. Wasserman | |||
| Painless Security | Painless Security | |||
| July 15, 2013 | October 15, 2013 | |||
| Efficiency aware IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimizations | Wired and Wireless IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimizations | |||
| draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-02 | draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-03 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (RFC 4861) protocol has been designed for | IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (RFC 4861) protocol has been designed for | |||
| neighbor's address resolution, unreachability detection, address | neighbor's address resolution, unreachability detection, address | |||
| autoconfiguration, router advertisement and solicitation. With the | autoconfiguration, router advertisement and solicitation. With the | |||
| progress of Internet adoption on various industries including home, | progress of Internet adoption on various industries including home, | |||
| wireless, M2M and cellular networks there is a desire for optimizing | wireless, M2M and cellular networks there is a desire for optimizing | |||
| the legacy IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol. This document describes | the legacy IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol. This document describes | |||
| a method of optimization by reducing multicast messages and | a method of optimization by reducing multicast messages and | |||
| introducing an IPv6 address Registration mechanism. Efficient IPv6 | introducing an IPv6 address Registration mechanism. The optimization | |||
| Neighbor Discovery protocol is useful for energy-efficient and low- | of IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol is useful for Wirless and low- | |||
| power IPv6 networks and as well as Data Center and Home Networks. | power IPv6 networks and as well as Data Centers and Home Networks. | |||
| The solution is capable of handling existing legacy IPv6 nodes in the | The solution is capable of handling existing legacy IPv6 nodes in the | |||
| network with local mobility. | network with local mobility. | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on January 16, 2014. | This Internet-Draft will expire on April 18, 2014. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
| to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
| include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
| the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
| described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 1.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1.1. Problem Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 1.2. Overview of the ND Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 1.2. Overview of the basic ND Optimization . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2. Definition Of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2. Definition Of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 3. Assumptions for efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery . . . . . 8 | 3. Assumptions for efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery . . . . . 8 | |||
| 4. The set of Requirements for efficiency and optimization . . . 8 | 4. The set of Requirements for efficiency and optimization . . . 8 | |||
| 5. Basic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 5. Basic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 6. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 6. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 7. New Neighbor Discovery Options and Messages . . . . . . . . . 10 | 7. New Neighbor Discovery Options and Messages . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 7.1. Address Registration Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 7.1. Address Registration Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 7.2. Refresh and De-registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 7.2. Refresh and De-registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 7.3. A New Router Advertisement Flag . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 7.3. A New Router Advertisement Flag . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 7.4. The Transaction Identification(TID) . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 7.4. The Transaction Identification(TID) . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 8. Efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages . . . . . . . . . 13 | 8. Efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 9. Efficiency-aware Host Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 9. Efficiency-aware Host Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 10. The Energy Aware Default Router (NEAR) Behavior . . . . . . . 15 | 10. The Efficiency Aware Default Router (NEAR) Behavior . . . . . 16 | |||
| 10.1. Router Configuration Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 10.1. Router Configuration Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 10.2. Movement Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 10.2. Movement Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 10.2.1. Registration ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 10.2.1. Registration ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 11. NCE Management in efficiency-aware Routers . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 11. NCE Management in efficiency-aware Routers . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 11.1. Handling ND DOS Attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 11.1. Handling ND DOS Attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 12. Mixed-Mode Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 12. Mixed-Mode Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 13. Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 13. Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 14. Handling Sleepy Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 14. Handling Sleepy Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 15. Duplicate Address Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 15. Duplicate Address Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 16. Mobility Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 16. Mobility Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 17. Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 17. Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| 17.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 17.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| 17.2. Proxying for Efficiency-Aware hosts . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 17.2. Proxying for Efficiency-Aware hosts . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| 17.3. DHCPv6 Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 17.3. DHCPv6 Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
| 18. RPL Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 18. RPL Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
| 19. Updated Neighbor Discovery Constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 19. Updated Neighbor Discovery Constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
| 20. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 20. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
| 21. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 21. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
| 22. Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 22. Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
| 23. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | 23. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| 24. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | 24. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| 24.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | 24.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| 24.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | 24.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | |||
| Appendix A. Usecase Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | Appendix A. Usecase Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | |||
| A.1. Data Center Routers on the link . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | A.1. Data Center Routers on the link . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | |||
| A.2. Edge Routers and Home Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | A.2. Edge Routers and Home Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | |||
| A.3. M2M Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | A.3. M2M Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | |||
| A.4. Wi-fi Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | A.4. Wi-fi Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | |||
| A.5. 3GPP Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | A.5. 3GPP Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | |||
| A.6. Industrial Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | A.6. Industrial Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | A.7. Set and forget offline network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | ||||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| Conceptually, IPv6 multicast messages are supposed to avoid broadcast | Conceptually, IPv6 multicast messages are supposed to avoid broadcast | |||
| messages, but in practice, the multicast operation at the link level | messages, but in practice, the multicast operation at the link level | |||
| is that of a broadcast nevertheless. This did not matter much at the | is that of a broadcast nevertheless. This did not matter much at the | |||
| time ND [ND] was originally designed, when an Ethernet network was | time ND [ND] was originally designed, when an Ethernet network was | |||
| more or less a single shared wire, but since then, large scale switch | more or less a single shared wire, but since then, large scale switch | |||
| fabrics, low power sleeping devices, mobile wireless/cellular devices | fabrics, low power sleeping devices, mobile wireless/cellular devices | |||
| and virtual machines have changed the landscape dramatically. | and virtual machines have changed the landscape dramatically. | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 31 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 31 ¶ | |||
| devices(L2/L3), Network edge devices performing subscriber access, | devices(L2/L3), Network edge devices performing subscriber access, | |||
| network devices that protect the ownership of an IPv6 address, | network devices that protect the ownership of an IPv6 address, | |||
| Overlay networks in data centers, Home Networks for IPv6 clients. | Overlay networks in data centers, Home Networks for IPv6 clients. | |||
| In general, there is a need for enhancing the IPv6 ND [ND] to make it | In general, there is a need for enhancing the IPv6 ND [ND] to make it | |||
| less chatty and flexible to work with different types of networking | less chatty and flexible to work with different types of networking | |||
| elements, physical and virtual networks and at the same time | elements, physical and virtual networks and at the same time | |||
| maintaining the IPv6 states to avoid duplicates or denial of | maintaining the IPv6 states to avoid duplicates or denial of | |||
| services. | services. | |||
| 1.1. Background | 1.1. Problem Areas | |||
| IPv6 ND [ND] is based on multicast signaling messages on the local | Specifically, the following are the issues with the IPv6 deployment | |||
| link in order to avoid broadcast messages. Following power-on and | in many wireless and high-density IPv6 subnets today: | |||
| initialization of the network in IPv6 Ethernet networks, a node joins | o The periodic RA messages in IPv6 ND [ND], and NS/NA messages | |||
| the solicited-node multicast address on the interface and then | require all IPv6 nodes in the link to be in listening mode even | |||
| performs duplicate address detection (DAD) for the acquired link- | when they are in idle cycle. It requires energy for the sleepy | |||
| local address by sending a solicited-node multicast message to the | nodes which may otherwise be sleeping during the idle period. | |||
| link. After that it sends multicast router solicitation (RS) | Non-sleepy nodes also spends more energy since they are in | |||
| messages to the all-router address to solicit router advertisements. | continuous listening mode. With the explosion of Internet-of- | |||
| Once the host receives a valid router advertisement (RA) with the "A" | things and machine to machine communication, more and more devices | |||
| flag, it autoconfigures the IPv6 address with the advertised prefix | would be using IPv6 addresses in the near future. | |||
| in the router advertisement (RA). Besides this, the IPv6 routers | o With WIFI, a multicast message will consume the wireless link on | |||
| usually send router advertisements periodically on the network. RAs | all Access Points around a switched fabric and will be transmitted | |||
| are sent to the all-node multicast address. The minimum RA interval | at the lowest speed possible in order to ensure the maximum | |||
| range can be 3sec to 600sec depending on applications. Nodes send | reception by all wireless nodes. This means that in an | |||
| Neighbor Solicitation (NS) and Neighbor Advertisement (NA) messages | environment where bandwidth is scarce, a single multicast packet | |||
| to resolve the IPv6 address of the destination on the link. These | may consume the bandwidth for hundreds of unicast packets. Sadly, | |||
| NS/NA messages are also often multicast messages and it is assumed | IPv6 ND is a major source of multicast messages in wireless | |||
| that the node is on the same link and relies on the fact that the | devices, since such messages are triggered each time a wireless | |||
| destination node is always powered and generally available. | device changes its point of attachment. | |||
| The periodic RA messages in IPv6 ND [ND], and NS/NA messages require | o In a datacenter, where VM mobility and VM address reslution also | |||
| all IPv6 nodes in the link to be in listening mode even when they are | trigger storms of IPv6 ND multicast messages, which become a major | |||
| in idle cycle. It requires energy for the sleepy nodes which may | hassle as the number of VM may scale to the tens of thousands in a | |||
| otherwise be sleeping during the idle period. Non-sleepy nodes also | large Data Center. At the IETF, a WG discusses such problems with | |||
| spends more energy since they are in continuous listening mode. With | Address Resolution in Massive Datacenters (ARMD). | |||
| the explosion of Internet-of-things and machine to machine | ||||
| communication, more and more devices would be using IPv6 addresses in | ||||
| the near future. Since Neighbor Discovery is at the heart of IPv6 | ||||
| protocol, there is a need to make this protocol more efficient. | ||||
| 1.2. Overview of the ND Optimization | The following paragraph elaborates the source of all the multicast | |||
| messages in IPv6 ND. | ||||
| IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimization for 6LoWPAN [6LOWPAN-ND] | Following power-on and initialization of the network in IPv6 Ethernet | |||
| addresses many of the concerns described above by optimizing the | networks, a node joins the solicited-node multicast address on the | |||
| Router advertisement, minimizing periodic multicast packets in the | interface and then performs duplicate address detection (DAD) for the | |||
| network and introducing two new options - one for node registration | acquired link-local address by sending a solicited-node multicast | |||
| and another for prefix dissemination in a network where all nodes in | message to the link. After that it sends multicast router | |||
| the network are uniquely identified by their 64-bit Interface | solicitation (RS) messages to the all-router address to solicit | |||
| Identifier. EUI-64 identifiers are recommended as unique Interface | router advertisements. Once the host receives a valid router | |||
| Identifiers, however if the network is isolated from the Internet, | advertisement (RA) with the "A" flag, it autoconfigures the IPv6 | |||
| uniqueness of the identifiers may be obtained by other mechanisms | address with the advertised prefix in the router advertisement (RA). | |||
| such as a random number generator with lowest collision rate. | Besides this, the IPv6 routers usually send router advertisements | |||
| Although, the ND optimization [6LOWPAN-ND] applies to 6LoWPAN | periodically on the network. RAs are sent to the all-node multicast | |||
| [LOWPAN] network, the concept is mostly applicable to a power-aware | address. The minimum RA interval range can be 3sec to 600sec | |||
| IPv6 network. Therefore, this document generalizes the address | depending on applications. Nodes send Neighbor Solicitation (NS) and | |||
| registration and multicast reduction in [6LOWPAN-ND] to all IPv6 | Neighbor Advertisement (NA) messages to resolve the IPv6 address of | |||
| links. | the destination on the link. These NS/NA messages are also often | |||
| multicast messages and it is assumed that the node is on the same | ||||
| link and relies on the fact that the destination node is always | ||||
| powered and generally available. | ||||
| 1.2. Overview of the basic ND Optimization | ||||
| In a nutshell, the following basic optimizations are made from the | ||||
| original IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol [ND]: | ||||
| o Adds Node Registration at the default subnet-router | ||||
| o Introduces a EUI-64 identifier for identification during | ||||
| initiation | ||||
| o Does not require unsolicited periodic Router Advertisements | ||||
| o No multicast messages required for address resolution and DAD for | ||||
| non-link-local IP addresses | ||||
| o Introduces a short-lived temporary NCE entry for unregistered | ||||
| nodes that turns into a regular NCE upon registration | ||||
| o Supports mixed mode operations where legacy IPv6 nodes and | ||||
| enahnced optimized routers can co-exist during the transition | ||||
| period. | ||||
| EUI-64 identifiers are recommended as unique Interface Identifiers, | ||||
| however if the network is isolated from the Internet, uniqueness of | ||||
| the identifiers may be obtained by other mechanisms such as a random | ||||
| number generator with lowest collision rate. Although, the ND | ||||
| optimization [6LOWPAN-ND] applies to 6LoWPAN [LOWPAN] networks, the | ||||
| concept is mostly applicable to power-aware IPv6 networks. | ||||
| Therefore, this document generalizes the address registration and | ||||
| multicast reduction in [6LOWPAN-ND] to all IPv6 links. | ||||
| Thus optimizing the regular IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [ND] to minimize | Thus optimizing the regular IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [ND] to minimize | |||
| total number of related signaling messages without losing generality | total number of related signaling messages without losing generality | |||
| of Neighbor Discovery, autoconfiguration and reliable host-router | of Neighbor Discovery, autoconfiguration and reliable host-router | |||
| communication, are desirable in any modern IPv6 networks such as | communication, are desirable in any modern IPv6 networks such as | |||
| Home, Enterprise networks, Data Centers and Operator's Cellular/ | Home, Enterprise networks, Data Centers and Operator's Cellular/ | |||
| Wireless networks. | Wireless networks. | |||
| The optimization will be highly effective for links and nodes which | The optimization will be highly effective for links and nodes which | |||
| do not support multicast and as well as for a multicast network | do not support multicast and as well as for a multicast network | |||
| without MLD snooping switches. Moreover, in the MLD-snooping | without MLD snooping switches. Moreover, in the MLD-snooping | |||
| networks the MLD switches will deal with less number of multicasts. | networks the MLD switches will deal with less number of multicasts. | |||
| The goal of this document is to provide an efficient Neighbor | The goal of this document is to provide an efficient Neighbor | |||
| Discovery Protocol in classic IPv6 subnets and links. Research | Discovery Protocol in classic IPv6 subnets in wireless/wired links. | |||
| indicates that often networked-nodes require more energy than stand- | ||||
| alone nodes because a node's energy usage depends on network messages | ||||
| it receives and responds. While reducing energy consumption is | ||||
| essential for battery operated nodes in some machines, saving energy | ||||
| actually a cost factor in business in general as the explosion of | ||||
| more device usage is leading to usage of more servers and network | ||||
| infrastructure in all sectors of the society and business. Thus this | ||||
| document introduces the node registration concept discussed in | ||||
| 6LoWPAN [LOWPAN], without handling the 'multi-level subnets' | ||||
| scenarios that are not the typical usecases in classic IPv6 subnets. | ||||
| In the process, the node registration method is also deemed to be | In the process, the node registration method is also deemed to be | |||
| useful for preventing Neighbor Discovery denial of service ( ND DOS) | useful for preventing Neighbor Discovery denial of service ( ND DOS) | |||
| attacks. | attacks. | |||
| The proposed changes can be used in two different ways. In one case | The proposed changes can be used in two different ways. In one case | |||
| all the hosts and routers on a link implement the new mechanisms, | all the hosts and routers on a link implement the new mechanisms, | |||
| which gives the maximum benefits. In another case the link has a | which gives the maximum benefits. In another case the link has a | |||
| mixture of new hosts and/or routers and legacy [RFC4861] hosts and | mixture of new hosts and/or routers and legacy [RFC4861] hosts and | |||
| routers, operating in a mixed-mode providing some of the benefits. | routers, operating in a mixed-mode providing some of the benefits. | |||
| In the following sections the document describes the basic operations | In the following sections the document describes the basic operations | |||
| of registration methods, optimization of Neighbor Discovery messages, | of registration methods, optimization of Neighbor Discovery messages, | |||
| interoperability with legacy IPv6 implementations and provides a | interoperability with legacy IPv6 implementations and provides a | |||
| section on use-case scenarios where it can be typically applicable. | section on use-case scenarios where it can be typically applicable. | |||
| This document also describes an optional feature for node mobility in | This document also describes an optional feature for enabling node | |||
| the LLN network using backbone routers(BBR) or multiple default | mobility in the LLN network using backbone routers(BBR) or multiple | |||
| subnet routers. This optional feature in generating a sequence ID by | default subnet routers. This optional feature generates a sequence | |||
| the host in the registration message will be helpful for deploying | ID by the host in the registration message for deploying some routing | |||
| RPL[RFC6550] with reliability in the LLN. | protocols (example: RPL [RFC6550]) with reliability in the LLN. | |||
| 2. Definition Of Terms | 2. Definition Of Terms | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
| document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. | document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. | |||
| multi-level Subnets: | multi-level Subnets: | |||
| It is a wireless link determined by one IPv6 off-link prefix in a | A wireless link determined by one IPv6 off-link prefix in a | |||
| network where in order to reach a destination with same prefix a | network where in order to reach a destination with same prefix a | |||
| packet may have to travel through one more 'intermediate' routers | packet may have to travel through one or more 'intermediate' | |||
| which relays the packet to the next 'intermediate' router or the | routers which relay the packet to the next 'intermediate' router | |||
| host in its own. | or the host in its own. | |||
| Border Router(BR): | Border Router(BR): | |||
| A border router is typically located at the junction Internet and | A border router is typically located at the junction of Internet | |||
| Home Network. An IPv6 router with one interface connected to IPv6 | and Home Network. An IPv6 router with one interface connected to | |||
| subnet and other interface connecting to a non-classic IPv6 | an IPv6 subnet and other interface connecting to a non-classic | |||
| interface such as 6LoWPAN interface. Border router is usually the | IPv6 interface such as 6LoWPAN interface. A Border router is | |||
| gateway to the IPv6 network or Internet. | usually the gateway between the IPv6 network and Internet. | |||
| Backbone: | Backbone: | |||
| This is an IPv6 transit link that interconnects 2 or more Low | This is an IPv6 transit link that interconnects 2 or more Low | |||
| Power Lossy Networks (LLNs). It is expected to be deployed as a | Power Lossy Networks (LLNs). It is expected to be deployed as a | |||
| high speed backbone in order to federate a potentially large set | high speed backbone in order to federate a potentially large set | |||
| of LLN nodes. Also referred to as a LLN backbone or Backbone | of LLN nodes. Also referred to as a LLN backbone or Backbone | |||
| network. | network in this document. | |||
| Backbone Router: | Backbone Router: | |||
| An IPv6 router that federates the LLN using a transit link as a | An IPv6 router that federates the LLN using a transit link as a | |||
| backbone. A BBR acts as a 6LoWPAN Border Routers (6LBR) and an | backbone. A BBR acts as a 6LoWPAN Border Router (6LBR) and an | |||
| Energy Aware Default Router (NEAR). | Efficiency Aware Default Router (NEAR). | |||
| Efficiency-Aware Network: | Efficiency-Aware Network: | |||
| An Efficiency-Aware network is composed of network elements that | An Efficiency-Aware network is composed of network elements that | |||
| are sensitive to energy usage or number of signaling messages in | are sensitive to energy usage or number of signaling messages in | |||
| the network. An efficiency-aware network may also contain links | the network. An efficiency-aware network may also contain links | |||
| that do not support multicast or it does not have MLD snooping | that do not support multicast or it does not have MLD snooping | |||
| capabilities and yet the network likes to communicate most | capabilities and yet the network likes to communicate most | |||
| efficiently with minimum number of signaling messages. Data | efficiently with minimum number of signaling messages. Data | |||
| center networks with virtual machines, cellular IPv6 networks, any | center networks with virtual machines, cellular IPv6 networks, any | |||
| IPv6 networks with energy-sensitive nodes are examples of | IPv6 networks with energy-sensitive nodes are examples of | |||
| Efficiency-Aware networks. | Efficiency-Aware networks. | |||
| IPv6 ND-efficiency-aware Router(NEAR): | IPv6 ND-efficiency-aware Router(NEAR): | |||
| It is the default Router of the single hop IPv6 subnet. This | The default Router of the single hop IPv6 subnet. This router | |||
| router implements the optimizations specified in this document. | implements the optimizations specified in this document. This | |||
| This router should be able to handle both legacy IPv6 nodes and | router should be able to handle both legacy IPv6 nodes and nodes | |||
| nodes that sends registration request. | that sends registration request. | |||
| Efficiency-Aware Host(EAH): | Efficiency-Aware Host(EAH): | |||
| A host in a IPv6 network is considered a IPv6 node without routing | A host in a IPv6 network is considered a IPv6 node without routing | |||
| and forwarding capability. The EAH is the host which implements | and forwarding capability. The EAH is the host which implements | |||
| the host functionality for optimized Neighbor Discovery mentioned | the host functionality for optimized Neighbor Discovery mentioned | |||
| in this document. | in this document. | |||
| Legacy IPv6 Host: | Legacy IPv6 Host: | |||
| A host in a IPv6 network is considered a IPv6 node without routing | A host in a IPv6 network is considered a IPv6 node without routing | |||
| and forwarding capability and implements RFC 4861 host functions. | and forwarding capability and implements RFC 4861 host functions. | |||
| Legacy IPv6 Router: | Legacy IPv6 Router: | |||
| An IPv6 Router which implements RFC 4861 Neighbor Discovery | An IPv6 Router which implements RFC 4861 Neighbor Discovery | |||
| protocols. | protocols. | |||
| EUI-64: | EUI-64: | |||
| It is the IEEE defined 64-bit extended unique identifier formed by | It is the IEEE defined 64-bit extended unique identifier formed by | |||
| concatenation of 24-bit or 36-bit company id value by IEEE | concatenation of 24-bit or 36-bit company id value by IEEE | |||
| Registration Authority and the extension identifier within that | Registration Authority and the extension identifier within that | |||
| company-id assignment. The extension identifiers are 40-bit (for | company-id assignment. The extension identifiers are 40-bit (for | |||
| 24-bit company-id) or 28-bit (for the 36-bit company-id) | 24-bit company-id) or 28-bit (for the 36-bit company-id) | |||
| respectively. | respectively. | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 4 ¶ | |||
| 4. The set of Requirements for efficiency and optimization | 4. The set of Requirements for efficiency and optimization | |||
| o Node Registration: Node initiated Registration and address | o Node Registration: Node initiated Registration and address | |||
| allocation is done in order to avoid periodic multicast Router | allocation is done in order to avoid periodic multicast Router | |||
| Advertisement messages and often Neighbor Address resolution can | Advertisement messages and often Neighbor Address resolution can | |||
| be skipped as all packets go via the default router which now | be skipped as all packets go via the default router which now | |||
| knows about all the registered nodes. Node Registration enables | knows about all the registered nodes. Node Registration enables | |||
| reduction of all-node and solicited-node multicast messages in the | reduction of all-node and solicited-node multicast messages in the | |||
| subnet. | subnet. | |||
| o Address allocation of registered nodes [ND] are performed using | o Address allocation of registered nodes [ND] are performed using | |||
| IPv6 Autoconfiguration [AUTOCONF]. | IPv6 Autoconfiguration [AUTOCONF]. | |||
| o Host initiated Registration and Refresh is done by sending a | o Host initiated Registration and Refresh is done by sending a | |||
| Router Solicitation and then a Neighbor Solicitation Message using | Router Solicitation and then a Neighbor Solicitation Message using | |||
| Address Registration Option (described below). | Address Registration Option (described below). | |||
| o The node registration may replace the requirement of doing | o The node registration may replace the requirement of doing | |||
| Duplicate Address Detection. | Duplicate Address Detection. | |||
| o Sleepy hosts are supported by this Neighbor Discovery procedures | o Sleepy hosts are supported by this Neighbor Discovery procedures | |||
| as they are not woken up periodically by Router Advertisement | as they are not woken up periodically by Router Advertisement | |||
| multicast messages or Neighbor Solicitation multicast messages. | multicast messages or Neighbor Solicitation multicast messages. | |||
| Sleepy nodes may wake up in its own schedule and send unicast | Sleepy nodes may wake up in its own schedule and send unicast | |||
| registration refresh messages when needed. | registration refresh messages when needed. | |||
| o Since this document requires formation of an IPv6 address with an | o Since this document requires formation of an IPv6 address with an | |||
| unique 64-bit Interface ID(EUI-64) is required for global IPv6 | unique 64-bit Interface ID(EUI-64) is required for global IPv6 | |||
| addresses, if the network is an isolated one and uses ULA [ULA] as | addresses, if the network is an isolated one and uses ULA [ULA] as | |||
| its IPv6 address then the deployment should make sure that each | its IPv6 address then the deployment should make sure that each | |||
| MAC address in that network has unique address and can provide a | MAC address in that network has unique address and can provide a | |||
| unique 64-bit ID for each node in the network. | unique 64-bit ID for each node in the network. | |||
| o /64-bit Prefix is required to form the IPv6 address. | o A /64-bit Prefix is required to form the IPv6 address. | |||
| o MTU requirement is same as IPv6 network. | o MTU requirement is same as IPv6 network. | |||
| 5. Basic Operations | 5. Basic Operations | |||
| In the efficient-nd IPv6 Network, the NEAR routers are the default | In the efficient-nd IPv6 Network, the NEAR routers are the default | |||
| routers for the efficiency-aware hosts (EAH). During the startup or | routers for the efficiency-aware hosts (EAH). During the startup or | |||
| joining the network the host does not wait for the Router | joining the network the host does not wait for the Router | |||
| Advertisements as the NEAR routers do not perform periodic multicast | Advertisements as the NEAR routers do not perform periodic multicast | |||
| RA as per RFC 4861. Instead, the EAH sends a multicast RS to find | RA as per RFC 4861. Instead, the EAH sends a multicast RS to find | |||
| out a NEAR router in the network. The RS message is the same as in | out a NEAR router in the network. The RS message is the same as in | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 9 ¶ | |||
| When a IPv6 network consists of both legacy hosts and EAH, and if the | When a IPv6 network consists of both legacy hosts and EAH, and if the | |||
| NEAR is configured for 'mixed mode' operation, it should be able to | NEAR is configured for 'mixed mode' operation, it should be able to | |||
| handle Address Registration Option(ARO) requests and send periodic | handle Address Registration Option(ARO) requests and send periodic | |||
| RA. Thus it should be able to serve both efficiency-aware hosts and | RA. Thus it should be able to serve both efficiency-aware hosts and | |||
| legacy hosts. Similarly, a legacy host compatible EAH falls back to | legacy hosts. Similarly, a legacy host compatible EAH falls back to | |||
| RFC 4861 host behavior if a NEAR is not present in the link. See the | RFC 4861 host behavior if a NEAR is not present in the link. See the | |||
| section on 'Mixed Mode Operations' for details below. | section on 'Mixed Mode Operations' for details below. | |||
| 6. Applicability Statement | 6. Applicability Statement | |||
| This document aims to guide the implementers to choose an appropriate | This document aims to guide implementers to choose an appropriate | |||
| IPv6 neighbor discovery and Address configuration procedures suitable | IPv6 neighbor discovery and Address configuration procedures suitable | |||
| for any efficient IPv6 network. These optimization is equally useful | for any efficient IPv6 network. These optimizations are equally | |||
| for the energy-sensitive, non-multicast links and for classical IPv6 | useful for the energy-sensitive, non-multicast links and for | |||
| networks i.e. home networks, Data-Center IPv6 overlay networks where | classical IPv6 networks i.e. home networks, Data-Center IPv6 overlay | |||
| saving Neighbor Discovery messages will reduce cost and increase | networks where saving Neighbor Discovery messages will reduce cost | |||
| bandwidth availability. | and increase bandwidth availability. | |||
| The address registration mechanism and associated extension on | The address registration mechanism and associated extension to the | |||
| Neighbor Discovery protocol allow a low-power host to move between | Neighbor Discovery protocol allow a low-power host to move between | |||
| the LLN and the classic IPv6 networks as well as movement from one | the LLN and the classic IPv6 networks as well as movement from one | |||
| Border Router registration area to another while staying within the | Border Router registration area to another while staying within the | |||
| same IPv6 subnet. | same IPv6 subnet. | |||
| Note that the specification allows 'Mixed-mode' operation in the | Note that the specification allows 'Mixed-mode' operation in the | |||
| efficiency-aware nodes for backward compatibility and transitioning | efficiency-aware nodes for backward compatibility and transitioning | |||
| to a complete efficiency-aware network of hosts and routers. Though | to a complete efficiency-aware network of hosts and routers. Though | |||
| the efficiency-aware only nodes will minimize the ND signaling and | the efficiency-aware only nodes will minimize the ND signaling and | |||
| DOS attacks in the LAN. | DOS attacks in the LAN. | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 31 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 46 ¶ | |||
| This section will discuss the registration and de-registration | This section will discuss the registration and de-registration | |||
| procedure of the hosts in the network. | procedure of the hosts in the network. | |||
| 7.1. Address Registration Option | 7.1. Address Registration Option | |||
| The Address Registration Option(ARO) is useful for avoiding Duplicate | The Address Registration Option(ARO) is useful for avoiding Duplicate | |||
| Address Detection messages since it requires a unique EUI-64 ID for | Address Detection messages since it requires a unique EUI-64 ID for | |||
| registration. The address registration is used for maintaining | registration. The address registration is used for maintaining | |||
| reachability of the node or host by the router. This option is | reachability of the node or host by the router. This option is | |||
| exactly the same as in [6LOWPAN-ND] which is reproduced here for the | almost the same ARO as in [6LOWPAN-ND]. A Transaction ID field and a | |||
| benefits of the readers. Additionally a Transaction ID field and a | ||||
| corresponding bit have been introduced in order to detect duplicate | corresponding bit have been introduced in order to detect duplicate | |||
| address registration and local mobility of a node. | address registration and local mobility of a node. | |||
| The routers keep track of host IP addresses that are directly | The routers keep track of host IP addresses that are directly | |||
| reachable and their corresponding link-layer addresses. This is | reachable and their corresponding link-layer addresses. This is | |||
| useful for lossy and lowpower networks(LLN) and as well as wired | useful for lossy and lowpower networks(LLN) and as well as wired IPv6 | |||
| networks. An Address Registration Option (ARO) can be included in | networks. An Address Registration Option (ARO) can be included in | |||
| unicast Neighbor Solicitation (NS) messages sent by hosts. Thus it | unicast Neighbor Solicitation (NS) messages sent by hosts. Thus it | |||
| can be included in the unicast NS messages that a host sends as part | can be included in the unicast NS messages that a host sends as part | |||
| of Neighbor Unreachability Detection to determine that it can still | of Neighbor Unreachability Detection to determine that it can still | |||
| reach a default router. The ARO is used by the receiving router to | reach a default router. The ARO is used by the receiving router to | |||
| reliably maintain its Neighbor Cache. The same option is included in | reliably maintain its Neighbor Cache. The same option is included in | |||
| corresponding Neighbor Advertisement (NA) messages with a Status | corresponding Neighbor Advertisement (NA) messages with a Status | |||
| field indicating the success or failure of the registration. This | field indicating the success or failure of the registration. This | |||
| option is always host initiated. | option is always host initiated. | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 33 ¶ | |||
| The sender of the NS also includes the EUI-64 of the interface it is | The sender of the NS also includes the EUI-64 of the interface it is | |||
| registering an address from. This is used as a unique ID for the | registering an address from. This is used as a unique ID for the | |||
| detection of duplicate addresses. It is used to tell the difference | detection of duplicate addresses. It is used to tell the difference | |||
| between the same node re-registering its address and a different node | between the same node re-registering its address and a different node | |||
| (with a different EUI-64) registering an address that is already in | (with a different EUI-64) registering an address that is already in | |||
| use by someone else. The EUI-64 is also used to deliver an NA | use by someone else. The EUI-64 is also used to deliver an NA | |||
| carrying an error Status code to the EUI-64 based link-local IPv6 | carrying an error Status code to the EUI-64 based link-local IPv6 | |||
| address of the host. | address of the host. | |||
| When the ARO is used by hosts an SLLA option MUST be included and the | When the ARO is used by hosts and SLLA option MUST be included [ | |||
| address that is to be registered MUST be the IPv6 source address of | except for the point-to-point links (example: IP-in-IP tunnel)] and | |||
| the Neighbor Solicitation message. | the target address for to-be registered node MUST be the IPv6 source | |||
| address of the Neighbor Solicitation message. | ||||
| Note that a node should be able to register with a default router | ||||
| with multiple IPv6 addresses (including privacy addresses). | ||||
| 0 1 2 3 | 0 1 2 3 | |||
| 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Type | Length = 2 | Status | Reserved | | | Type | Length = 2 | Status | Reserved | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Reservd |T| TID | Registration Lifetime | | | Reservd |T| TID | Registration Lifetime | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| + EUI-64 or equivalent + | + EUI-64 or equivalent + | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 24 ¶ | |||
| IPv6 hosts. EAH hosts use this flag in order to discover a NEAR | IPv6 hosts. EAH hosts use this flag in order to discover a NEAR | |||
| router if it receives multiple RA from both legacy and NEAR routers. | router if it receives multiple RA from both legacy and NEAR routers. | |||
| 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| |M|O|H|Prf|P|E|R| | |M|O|H|Prf|P|E|R| | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| The 'E' bit above MUST be 1 when a IPv6 router implements and | The 'E' bit above MUST be 1 when a IPv6 router implements and | |||
| configures the efficiency-aware Router behavior for Neighbor | configures the efficiency-aware Router behavior for Neighbor | |||
| Discovery as per this document. All other cases E bit is 0. | Discovery as per this document. All other cases the E bit MUST be 0. | |||
| The legacy IPv6 hosts will ignore the E bit in RA advertisement. All | The legacy IPv6 hosts will ignore the E bit in RA advertisement. All | |||
| EAH MUST look for E bit in RA in order to determine the efficiency- | EAH MUST look for E bit in RA in order to determine the efficiency- | |||
| aware support in the default router in the link. | aware support in the default router in the link. | |||
| 7.4. The Transaction Identification(TID) | 7.4. The Transaction Identification(TID) | |||
| The TID field is used together with age of a registration for | The TID field is used together with age of a registration for | |||
| arbitration between two routers (default or backbone) to ensure | arbitration between two routers (default or backbone) to ensure | |||
| freshness and ownership of the registration of a given target | freshness and ownership of the registration of a given target | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 46 ¶ | |||
| registration are valid. In case of a mismatch between comparable | registration are valid. In case of a mismatch between comparable | |||
| TIDs, the most recent TID wins. The TID definition used in section | TIDs, the most recent TID wins. The TID definition used in section | |||
| 6.4.1 of RFC 6550 for DAOSequence number would be applicable for here | 6.4.1 of RFC 6550 for DAOSequence number would be applicable for here | |||
| for TID in ARO message. | for TID in ARO message. | |||
| It is 8 bit field. TID is generated by the host at the time of a new | It is 8 bit field. TID is generated by the host at the time of a new | |||
| registraton request. | registraton request. | |||
| This document assumes that an implementation will have configuration | This document assumes that an implementation will have configuration | |||
| knobs to determine whether it is running in classical IPv6 ND [ND] or | knobs to determine whether it is running in classical IPv6 ND [ND] or | |||
| Optimized Energy Aware ND (this document) mode or both(Mixed mode). | Efficiency Aware ND (this document) mode or both(Mixed mode). | |||
| 8. Efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages | 8. Efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages | |||
| Router Advertisement(RA): Periodic RAs SHOULD be avoided. Only | Router Advertisement(RA): Periodic RAs SHOULD be avoided. Only | |||
| solicited RAs are RECOMMENDED. An RA MUST | solicited RAs are RECOMMENDED. An RA MUST | |||
| contain the Source Link-layer Address option | contain the Source Link-layer Address option | |||
| containing Router's link-layer address (this | containing Router's link-layer address (this | |||
| is optional in [ND]. An RA MUST carry Prefix | is optional in [ND]. An RA MUST carry Prefix | |||
| information option with L bit being unset, so | information option with L bit being unset, so | |||
| that hosts do not multicast any NS messages | that hosts do not multicast any NS messages | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 12 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 31 ¶ | |||
| This is possible since the RS always includes | This is possible since the RS always includes | |||
| a SLLA option, which is used by the router to | a SLLA option, which is used by the router to | |||
| unicast the RA. | unicast the RA. | |||
| Router Solicitation(RS): Upon system startup, the node sends a | Router Solicitation(RS): Upon system startup, the node sends a | |||
| multicast or link broadcast (when multicast | multicast or link broadcast (when multicast | |||
| is not supported at the link-layer) RS to | is not supported at the link-layer) RS to | |||
| find out the available routers in the link. | find out the available routers in the link. | |||
| An RS may be sent at other times as described | An RS may be sent at other times as described | |||
| in section 6.3.7 of RFC 4861. A Router | in section 6.3.7 of RFC 4861. A Router | |||
| Solicitation MUST carry Source Link-layer | Solicitation MUST carry Source Link-layer | |||
| Address option. Since no periodic RAs are | Address option except for the point-to-point | |||
| allowed in the efficiency-aware IPv6 network, | links. Since no periodic RAs are allowed in | |||
| the host may send periodic unicast RS to the | the efficiency-aware IPv6 network, the host | |||
| routers. The time-periods for the RS varies | may send periodic unicast RS to the routers. | |||
| on the deployment scenarios and the Default | The time-periods for the RS varies on the | |||
| Router Lifetime advertised in the RAs. | deployment scenarios and the Default Router | |||
| Lifetime advertised in the RAs. | ||||
| Default Router Selection: Same as in section 6.3.6 of RFC 4861[ND]. | Default Router Selection: Same as in section 6.3.6 of RFC 4861[ND]. | |||
| Neighbor Solicitation (NS): Neighbor solicitation is used between | Neighbor Solicitation (NS): Neighbor solicitation is used between | |||
| the hosts and the default-router as part of | the hosts and the default-router as part of | |||
| NUD and registering the host's address(es). | NUD and registering the host's address(es). | |||
| An NS message MUST use the Address | An NS message MUST use the Address | |||
| Registration option in order to accomplish | Registration option in order to accomplish | |||
| the registration. | the registration. | |||
| Neighbor Advertisement (NA): As defined in [ND] and ARO option. | Neighbor Advertisement (NA): As defined in [ND] and ARO option. | |||
| Redirect Messages: A router SHOULD NOT send a Redirect message | Redirect Messages: A router SHOULD NOT send a Redirect message | |||
| to a host since the link has non-transitive | to a host since the link has non-transitive | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 16, line 4 ¶ | |||
| A host always sends packets to (one of) its default router(s). This | A host always sends packets to (one of) its default router(s). This | |||
| is accomplished by the routers never setting the 'L' flag in the | is accomplished by the routers never setting the 'L' flag in the | |||
| Prefix options. | Prefix options. | |||
| The host is unable to forward routes or participate in a routing | The host is unable to forward routes or participate in a routing | |||
| protocol. A legacy IPv6 Host compliant EAH SHOULD be able to fall | protocol. A legacy IPv6 Host compliant EAH SHOULD be able to fall | |||
| back to RFC 4861 host behavior if there is no efficiency-aware router | back to RFC 4861 host behavior if there is no efficiency-aware router | |||
| (NEAR) in the link. | (NEAR) in the link. | |||
| The efficiency-aware host MUST NOT send or accept re-direct messages. | The efficiency-aware host MUST NOT send or accept re-direct messages. | |||
| It does not join solicited node multicast address. | It does not join solicited node multicast address. | |||
| If the EAH is capable of generating TID and configured for this | If the EAH is capable of generating TID and configured for this | |||
| operation, the EAH MUST use the TID field and appropriate associated | operation, the EAH MUST use the TID field and appropriate associated | |||
| operation bits in the ARO message during registration and refresh. | operation bits in the ARO message during registration and refresh. | |||
| 10. The Energy Aware Default Router (NEAR) Behavior | In some cases, hosts may need to send MAX_RTR_SOLICITATIONS(3) to | |||
| receive the reply back from the default router. In a lossy link or | ||||
| due to sleepy default router, the hosts may have to send more than 3 | ||||
| solicitations [Resilient-RS]. But this can easily increase the | ||||
| number of siganling traffic in the network. Thus it is RECOMMEDED | ||||
| that the EAH nodes start with the default MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION [ND] | ||||
| value in a low power network. | ||||
| However, in some scenarios the packet loss resilient router | ||||
| solicitation method may be applicable [Resilient-RS]. | ||||
| 10. The Efficiency Aware Default Router (NEAR) Behavior | ||||
| The main purpose of the default router in the context of this | The main purpose of the default router in the context of this | |||
| document is to receive and process the registration request, forward | document is to receive and process the registration request, forward | |||
| packets from one neighbor to the other, informs the routing protocol | packets from one neighbor to the other, informs the routing protocol | |||
| about the un-availability of the registered nodes if the routing | about the un-availability of the registered nodes if the routing | |||
| protocol requires this information for the purpose of mobility or | protocol requires this information for the purpose of mobility or | |||
| fast convergence. A default router (NEAR) behavior may be observed | fast convergence. A default router (NEAR) behavior may be observed | |||
| in one or more interfaces of a Border Router(BR). | in one or more interfaces of a Border Router(BR). | |||
| A Border Router normally may have multiple interfaces and connects | A Border Router normally may have multiple interfaces and connects | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 18 ¶ | |||
| Lifetime expires. If an ARO arrives for an NCE that is in | Lifetime expires. If an ARO arrives for an NCE that is in | |||
| UNCREACHABLE state, that NCE should be marked as STALE. | UNCREACHABLE state, that NCE should be marked as STALE. | |||
| A default router keeps a cache for all the nodes' IP addresses, | A default router keeps a cache for all the nodes' IP addresses, | |||
| created from the Address Registration processing. | created from the Address Registration processing. | |||
| 10.1. Router Configuration Modes | 10.1. Router Configuration Modes | |||
| An efficiency-aware Router(NEAR) MUST be able to configure in | An efficiency-aware Router(NEAR) MUST be able to configure in | |||
| efficiency-aware-only mode where it will expect all hosts register | efficiency-aware-only mode where it will expect all hosts register | |||
| with the router following RS; thus will not support legacy hosts. | with the router following RS; thus NEAR will not support legacy | |||
| However, it will create legacy NCE for NS messages for other routers | hosts. However, it will create legacy NCE for the routers in the | |||
| in the network. This mode is able to prevent ND flooding on the | network assuming that the routers do not register with it. This mode | |||
| link. | is able to prevent ND flooding on the link. | |||
| An efficiency-aware Router(NEAR) SHOULD be able to have configuration | An efficiency-aware Router(NEAR) SHOULD be able to have configuration | |||
| knob to configure itself in Mixed-Mode where it will support both | knob to configure itself in Mixed-Mode where it will support both | |||
| efficiency-aware hosts and legacy hosts. However even in mixed-mode | efficiency-aware hosts and legacy hosts. However even in mixed-mode | |||
| the router should check for duplicate entries in the NCE before | the router should check for duplicate entries in the NCE before | |||
| creating a new ones and it should rate-limit creating new NCE based | creating a new ones and it should rate-limit creating new NCE based | |||
| on requests from the same host MAC address. | on requests from the same host MAC address. | |||
| The RECOMMENDED default mode of operation for the efficiency-aware | The RECOMMENDED default mode of operation for the efficiency-aware | |||
| router is Mixed-mode. Though it cannot reap the full benefit of | router is Mixed-mode. Though it cannot reap the full benefit of | |||
| efficiency related optimization described in this document. | efficiency related optimization described in this document. | |||
| 10.2. Movement Detection | 10.2. Movement Detection | |||
| When a host moves from one subnet to another its IPv6 prefix changes | When a host moves from one subnet to another its IPv6 prefix changes | |||
| and the movement detection is determined according to the existing | and the movement detection is determined according to the existing | |||
| IPv6 movement detection described in [DNA]. | IPv6 movement detection described in [DNA]. | |||
| However, if the movement happens across different default routers in | However, if the movement happens across different default routers in | |||
| the subnet and the node likes to register with one of the default | the subnet and the node likes to register with one of the default | |||
| routers closest to its present location, it must send another | routers closest to its present location, it MUST send another | |||
| registration request to the new default router. The new default | registration request to the new default router. The new default | |||
| router then first send an NS to its peers with a link scope multicast | router then first sends a NS to its peers with a link scope multicast | |||
| message to IPv6 address ff02::2 with the ARO option. | message to IPv6 address ff02::2 with the ARO option. | |||
| 10.2.1. Registration ownership | 10.2.1. Registration ownership | |||
| The subnet-local-routers check their respective NCE table for the | The subnet-local-routers check their respective NCE table for the | |||
| particular registration. If the registration entry exists, the NEAR | particular registration. If the registration entry exists, the NEAR | |||
| default router then calculates the 'age' of the registration by | default router then calculates the 'age' of the registration by | |||
| subtracting the present time from the registration received time | subtracting the present time from the registration received time | |||
| recorded at the NCE. The NEAR router then responds with a NA with | recorded at the NCE. The NEAR router then responds with a NA with | |||
| ARO option Status being equal to 3 and replaces the 'registration | ARO option Status being equal to 3 and replaces the 'registration | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 21, line 46 ¶ | |||
| In mixed mode operation, the Router SHOULD be able to do local | In mixed mode operation, the Router SHOULD be able to do local | |||
| movement detection based on ARO if it is configured for that | movement detection based on ARO if it is configured for that | |||
| operation for EAH hosts. For the legacy hosts, the mixed-mode router | operation for EAH hosts. For the legacy hosts, the mixed-mode router | |||
| MAY follow classical IPv6 methods of movement detection and MAY act | MAY follow classical IPv6 methods of movement detection and MAY act | |||
| as ND proxy by sending NA with 'O' bit.[ Reference??] | as ND proxy by sending NA with 'O' bit.[ Reference??] | |||
| The routers that are running on efficiency-aware mode or legacy mode | The routers that are running on efficiency-aware mode or legacy mode | |||
| SHOULD NOT dynamically switch the mode without flushing the Neighbor | SHOULD NOT dynamically switch the mode without flushing the Neighbor | |||
| Cache Entries. | Cache Entries. | |||
| In mixed mode, the NEAR SHOULD have a configurable interval for | ||||
| periodic unsolicited router advertisements based on the media type. | ||||
| 13. Bootstrapping | 13. Bootstrapping | |||
| If the network is a efficiency-aware IPv6 subnet, and the efficiency- | The bootstrapping mechanism described here is applicable for the | |||
| aware Neighbor Discovery mechanism is used by the hosts and routers | efficiency-aware hosts and routers. At the start, the host uses its | |||
| as described in this document. At the start, the node uses its link- | link-local address to send Router Solicitation and then it sends the | |||
| local address to send Router Solicitation and then it sends the Node | Node Registration message as described in this document in order to | |||
| Registration message as described in this document in order to form | form the address. The Duplicate address detection process should be | |||
| the address. The Duplicate address detection process should be | ||||
| skipped if the network is guaranteed to have unique interface | skipped if the network is guaranteed to have unique interface | |||
| identifiers which is used to form an IPv6 address. | identifiers which is used to form an IPv6 address. | |||
| Node Router | Node Router | |||
| 0. |[Forms LL IPv6 addr] | | 0. |[Forms LL IPv6 addr] | | |||
| 1. | ---------- Router Solicitation --------> | | 1. | ---------- Router Solicitation --------> | | |||
| | [SLLAO] | | | [SLLAO] | | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 47 ¶ | |||
| be at least one legacy IPv6 router and another NEAR router present in | be at least one legacy IPv6 router and another NEAR router present in | |||
| the link. The legacy IPv6 router will follow RFC 4861 behavior and | the link. The legacy IPv6 router will follow RFC 4861 behavior and | |||
| NEAR router will follow the efficiency-aware behavior for | NEAR router will follow the efficiency-aware behavior for | |||
| registration, NCE maintenance, forwarding packets from a EAH and it | registration, NCE maintenance, forwarding packets from a EAH and it | |||
| will also act as a ND proxy for the legacy IPv6 hosts querying to | will also act as a ND proxy for the legacy IPv6 hosts querying to | |||
| resolve a EAH node. | resolve a EAH node. | |||
| A legacy IPv6 host and EAH are not expected to see a difference in | A legacy IPv6 host and EAH are not expected to see a difference in | |||
| their bootstrapping if both legacy and efficiency-aware | their bootstrapping if both legacy and efficiency-aware | |||
| functionalities of rotuers are available in the network. It is | functionalities of rotuers are available in the network. It is | |||
| RECOMMEDED that the EAH implementation SHOULD be able to behave like | RECOMMENDED that the EAH implementation SHOULD be able to behave like | |||
| a legacy IPv6 host if it discovers that no efficiency-aware routing | a legacy IPv6 host if it discovers that no efficiency-aware routing | |||
| support is present in the link. | support is present in the link. | |||
| 14. Handling Sleepy Nodes | 14. Handling Sleepy Nodes | |||
| The solution allows the sleepy nodes to complete its sleep schedule | The solution allows the sleepy nodes to complete its sleep schedule | |||
| without waking up due to periodic Router Advertisement messages or | without waking up due to periodic Router Advertisement messages or | |||
| due to Multicast Neighbor Solicitation for address resolution. The | due to Multicast Neighbor Solicitation for address resolution. The | |||
| node registration lifetime SHOULD be synchronized with its sleep | node registration lifetime SHOULD be synchronized with its sleep | |||
| interval period in order to avoid waking up in the middle of sleep | interval period in order to avoid waking up in the middle of sleep | |||
| skipping to change at page 24, line 22 ¶ | skipping to change at page 24, line 28 ¶ | |||
| 17.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) | 17.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) | |||
| IPv6 DNA[DNA] uses unicast ND probes and link-layer indications to | IPv6 DNA[DNA] uses unicast ND probes and link-layer indications to | |||
| detect movement of its network attachments. Upon detecting link- | detect movement of its network attachments. Upon detecting link- | |||
| layer indication, it sends a all-routers Solicitation message. When | layer indication, it sends a all-routers Solicitation message. When | |||
| the node implements this document along with DNA, it MUST send ARO | the node implements this document along with DNA, it MUST send ARO | |||
| option with its Neighbor Solicitation unicast message if the | option with its Neighbor Solicitation unicast message if the | |||
| candidate router advertisement indicates that the router is a NEAR | candidate router advertisement indicates that the router is a NEAR | |||
| router. If the candiate router is a legacy router then and it is the | router. If the candiate router is a legacy router then and it is the | |||
| only choice then the EAH host adapt to the legacy behavior. However | only choice then the EAH host SHOULD adapt to the legacy behavior. | |||
| if EAH node implements DNA host capability as well, then it SHOULD | However if EAH node implements DNA host capability as well, then it | |||
| give preference to the NEAR routers in its candidate list of routers. | SHOULD give preference to the NEAR routers in its candidate list of | |||
| routers. | ||||
| Thus the ND optimization solution will work seamlessly with DNA | Thus the ND optimization solution will work seamlessly with DNA | |||
| implementations and no change is required in DNA solution because of | implementations and no change is required in DNA solution because of | |||
| Neighbor Discovery updates. It is a deployment and configuration | Neighbor Discovery updates. It is a deployment and configuration | |||
| consideration as to run the network in mixed mode or efficient-mode. | consideration as to run the network in mixed mode or efficient-mode. | |||
| 17.2. Proxying for Efficiency-Aware hosts | 17.2. Proxying for Efficiency-Aware hosts | |||
| The efficient-ND SHOULD continue to support the legacy IPv6 Neighbor | The efficient-ND SHOULD continue to support the legacy IPv6 Neighbor | |||
| Solicitation requests in the mixed mode. The NEAR router SHOULD act | Solicitation requests in the mixed mode. The NEAR router SHOULD act | |||
| skipping to change at page 25, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 25, line 11 ¶ | |||
| option and the Override bit set if the ARO option in the NS indicates | option and the Override bit set if the ARO option in the NS indicates | |||
| either a different node (different EUI-64) or a older registration | either a different node (different EUI-64) or a older registration | |||
| (when comparing the TID). | (when comparing the TID). | |||
| o advertising a registered address over the backbone using NA | o advertising a registered address over the backbone using NA | |||
| messages, asynchronously or as a response to a Neighbor | messages, asynchronously or as a response to a Neighbor | |||
| Solicitation messages. | Solicitation messages. | |||
| o Looking up a destination over the backbone in order to deliver | o Looking up a destination over the backbone in order to deliver | |||
| packets arriving from the EAH host using Neighbor Solicitation | packets arriving from the EAH host using Neighbor Solicitation | |||
| messages. | messages. | |||
| o Forwarding packets from the EAH over the backbone, and the other | o Forwarding packets from the EAH over the backbone, and the other | |||
| way around at a time if the devide has known sleeping periods or | way around at a time if the devide has known sleeping periods or | |||
| resides on a different link such as an LLN attached to the | resides on a different link such as an LLN attached to the | |||
| backbone. | backbone. | |||
| Eventually triggering a look up for a destination EAH that would not | Eventually triggering a look-up for a destination EAH that would not | |||
| be registered at a given point of time, or as a verification of a | be registered at a given point of time, or as a verification of a | |||
| registration. | registration. | |||
| 17.3. DHCPv6 Interaction | 17.3. DHCPv6 Interaction | |||
| Co-existence with DHCP: For classical IPv6, if DHCPv6 or central | Co-existence with DHCP: For classical IPv6, if DHCPv6 or central | |||
| address allocation mechanism is used, then Neighbor Discovery | address allocation mechanism is used, then Neighbor Discovery | |||
| autoconfiguration is not used for global address allocation. | autoconfiguration is not used for global address allocation. | |||
| However, link-local duplicate address detection, Neighbor | However, link-local duplicate address detection, Neighbor | |||
| solicitation, Neighbor unreachability detection are still used. Upon | solicitation, Neighbor unreachability detection are still used. Upon | |||
| skipping to change at page 26, line 42 ¶ | skipping to change at page 27, line 4 ¶ | |||
| efficiency-aware mode. See Section 11.1. | efficiency-aware mode. See Section 11.1. | |||
| 21. IANA Considerations | 21. IANA Considerations | |||
| A new flag (E-bit) in RA has been introduced. IANA assignment of the | A new flag (E-bit) in RA has been introduced. IANA assignment of the | |||
| E-bit flag is required upon approval of this document. | E-bit flag is required upon approval of this document. | |||
| 22. Changelog | 22. Changelog | |||
| Changes from draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-energy-aware-nd-02: | Changes from draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-energy-aware-nd-02: | |||
| o Replaced energy-aware with efficency-aware which covers both | ||||
| energy efficiency and other operational efficiency | ||||
| o Added consideration for DNA, ND proxy and clarified that this is | ||||
| useful for networks with MLD-snooping switches as well | ||||
| o Added use-cases, Support for Mixed-mode operations and a diagram | ||||
| for bootstrapping scenario. | ||||
| o Clarified its applicability when DHCP is used for address | o Added clarification that SLLA is not required for ARO in a | |||
| allocation. | point-to-point link | |||
| o Clarified that the document is indeed an optimization for legacy | ||||
| IPv6 ND | ||||
| o Adressed editorial comments and fixed typoes. Some more | ||||
| editorial work is needed | ||||
| o Added another usecase for Z-Wave example. Clarified 3GPP | ||||
| Networks related comments on existing ND optimizations. | ||||
| 23. Acknowledgements | 23. Acknowledgements | |||
| The primary idea of this document are from 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery | The primary idea of this document are from 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery | |||
| document [6LOWPAN-ND] and the discussions from the 6lowpan working | document [6LOWPAN-ND] and the discussions from the 6lowpan working | |||
| group members, chairs Carsten Bormann and Geoff Mulligan and through | group members, chairs Carsten Bormann and Geoff Mulligan and through | |||
| our discussions with Zach Shelby, editor of the [6LOWPAN-ND]. | our discussions with Zach Shelby, editor of the [6LOWPAN-ND]. | |||
| The inspiration of such a IPv6 generic document came from Margaret | The inspiration of such a IPv6 generic document came from Margaret | |||
| Wasserman who saw a need for such a document at the IOT workshop at | Wasserman who saw a need for such a document at the IOT workshop at | |||
| Prague IETF. | Prague IETF. | |||
| The authors acknowledge the ND denial of service issues and key | The authors acknowledge the ND denial of service issues and key | |||
| causes mentioned in the draft-halpern-6man-nddos-mitigation document | causes mentioned in the draft-halpern-6man-nddos-mitigation document | |||
| by Joel Halpern. Thanks to Joel Halpern for pinpointing the problems | by Joel Halpern. Thanks to Joel Halpern for pinpointing the problems | |||
| that are now addressed in the NCE management section. | that are now addressed in the NCE management section. | |||
| The authors like to thank Dave Thaler, Jari Arkko, Ylva Jading, | The authors like to thank Dave Thaler, Stuart Cheshire, Jari Arkko, | |||
| Niklas J. Johnsson, Reda Nedjar, Purvi Shah, Jaume Rius Riu, Fredrik | Ylva Jading, Niklas J. Johnsson, Reda Nedjar, Purvi Shah, Jaume Rius | |||
| Garneij for their useful comments on this work. | Riu, Fredrik Garneij, Andrew Yourtchenko, Jouni Korhonen, Suresh | |||
| Krishnan, Brian Haberman, Anders Brandt, Mark Smith, Lorenzo Colitti, | ||||
| David Miles and Carsten Bormann for their useful comments and | ||||
| suggestions on this work. | ||||
| 24. References | 24. References | |||
| 24.1. Normative References | 24.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an | [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an | |||
| IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, | IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, | |||
| skipping to change at page 29, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 29, line 18 ¶ | |||
| October 2003. | October 2003. | |||
| [PD] Miwakawya, S., "Requirements for Prefix Delegation", | [PD] Miwakawya, S., "Requirements for Prefix Delegation", | |||
| RFC 3769, June 2004. | RFC 3769, June 2004. | |||
| [RF] Haberman, B. and B. Hinden, "IPv6 Router Advertisement | [RF] Haberman, B. and B. Hinden, "IPv6 Router Advertisement | |||
| Flags option", RFC 5175, March 2008. | Flags option", RFC 5175, March 2008. | |||
| [ULA] "Unique Local IPv6 Addresses", RFC 4193. | [ULA] "Unique Local IPv6 Addresses", RFC 4193. | |||
| [Resilient-RS] | ||||
| Krishnan, S., Anipko, D., and D. Thaler, "Packet loss | ||||
| resiliency for Router Solicitations", | ||||
| draft-ietf-6man-resilient-rs-01 (work in progress), | ||||
| May 2013. | ||||
| [IPV6M] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support | [IPV6M] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support | |||
| in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011. | in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011. | |||
| Appendix A. Usecase Analysis | Appendix A. Usecase Analysis | |||
| This section provides applicability scenarios where the efficiency- | This section provides applicability scenarios where the efficiency- | |||
| aware Neighbor Discovery will be most beneficial. | aware Neighbor Discovery will be most beneficial. Most likely the | |||
| usecases will be detailed in a separate document. | ||||
| A.1. Data Center Routers on the link | A.1. Data Center Routers on the link | |||
| Efficiency-aware Routers and hosts are useful in IPv6 networks in the | Efficiency-aware Routers and hosts are useful in IPv6 networks in the | |||
| Data Center as they produce less signaling and also provides ways to | Data Center as they produce less signaling and also provides ways to | |||
| minimize the ND flood of messages. Moreover, this mechanism will | minimize the ND flood of messages. Moreover, this mechanism will | |||
| work with data-center nodes which are deliberately in sleep mode for | work with data-center nodes which are deliberately in sleep mode for | |||
| saving energy. | saving energy. | |||
| This solution will work well in Data Center Virtual network and VM | This solution will work well in Data Center Virtual network and VM | |||
| skipping to change at page 30, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 30, line 43 ¶ | |||
| bandwidth for hundreds of unicast packets. | bandwidth for hundreds of unicast packets. | |||
| The Wi-fi IPv6 hosts can act as efficiency-aware hosts and register | The Wi-fi IPv6 hosts can act as efficiency-aware hosts and register | |||
| with their nearest default router with NEAR behavior. This method | with their nearest default router with NEAR behavior. This method | |||
| reduces multicast operations in the wireless access points or routers | reduces multicast operations in the wireless access points or routers | |||
| by using this optimization. | by using this optimization. | |||
| A.5. 3GPP Networks | A.5. 3GPP Networks | |||
| Section 9.2.1.1 of TS23.060 allows periodic RA and TS 123.401 stays | Section 9.2.1.1 of TS23.060 allows periodic RA and TS 123.401 stays | |||
| silent about periodic RA. Though the informational drafts and | silent about periodic RA while 3GPP TS29.061 recommends large values | |||
| RFC6459 about 3GPP systems IPv6 behavior provides best practices, | for minimum and maximum periodic router advertisements for reduced | |||
| this document provides standard based optimization that 3GPP systems | periodic mesages. Though RFC6459 describes best practices about IPv6 | |||
| can follow to improve efficiency in the mobile nodes and 3GPP | 3GPP systems behavior, this ND optimization standard specification | |||
| Routers. | will be a helpful reference for 3GPP documents. LTE terminals (cell | |||
| phones) may also benefit with reduced multicast messages described in | ||||
| this document in the wireless mode. | ||||
| A.6. Industrial Networks | A.6. Industrial Networks | |||
| RPL [RFC6550] is used for Industrial wireless networks. | RPL [RFC6550] is used for Industrial wireless networks. | |||
| A.7. Set and forget offline network | ||||
| Home control modules designed for networked environments may be | ||||
| deployed in very simple settings like garden path lighting controlled | ||||
| by wireless light and motion sensors. Once the network has been | ||||
| created and sensors have been associated with the light modules, the | ||||
| installer takes away the configuration tool which was used to set up | ||||
| the network. Most likely a ULA prefix is used, since multiple hops | ||||
| may be needed. None of the sensors and light modules has the | ||||
| capability of handing out fresh prefixes. Thus, for a set-and-forget | ||||
| style off-line network to work, the nodes must be provided an | ||||
| infinite prefix lifetime since they have nowhere to ask for a fresh | ||||
| one. | ||||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Samita Chakrabarti | Samita Chakrabarti | |||
| Ericsson | Ericsson | |||
| San Jose, CA | San Jose, CA | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: samita.chakrabarti@ericsson.com | Email: samita.chakrabarti@ericsson.com | |||
| Erik Nordmark | Erik Nordmark | |||
| Cisco Systems | ||||
| San Jose, CA | San Jose, CA | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: nordmark@cisco.com | Email: nordmark@sonic.net | |||
| Pascal Thubert | Pascal Thubert | |||
| Cisco Systems | Cisco Systems | |||
| Email: pthubert@cisco.com | Email: pthubert@cisco.com | |||
| Margaret Wasserman | Margaret Wasserman | |||
| Painless Security | Painless Security | |||
| Email: mrw@lilacglade.org | Email: mrw@lilacglade.org | |||
| End of changes. 62 change blocks. | ||||
| 163 lines changed or deleted | 222 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/ | ||||