| < draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-03.txt | draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-04.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6Lo Working Group P. Mariager | 6Lo Working Group P. Mariager | |||
| Internet-Draft J. Petersen, Ed. | Internet-Draft J. Petersen, Ed. | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track RTX A/S | Intended status: Standards Track RTX A/S | |||
| Expires: March 18, 2016 Z. Shelby | Expires: August 29, 2016 Z. Shelby | |||
| ARM | ARM | |||
| M. Van de Logt | M. Van de Logt | |||
| Gigaset Communications GmbH | Gigaset Communications GmbH | |||
| D. Barthel | D. Barthel | |||
| Orange Labs | Orange Labs | |||
| September 15, 2015 | February 26, 2016 | |||
| Transmission of IPv6 Packets over DECT Ultra Low Energy | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over DECT Ultra Low Energy | |||
| draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-03 | draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-04 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| DECT Ultra Low Energy is a low power air interface technology that is | DECT Ultra Low Energy is a low power air interface technology that is | |||
| defined by the DECT Forum and specified by ETSI. | defined by the DECT Forum and specified by ETSI. | |||
| The DECT air interface technology has been used world-wide in | The DECT air interface technology has been used world-wide in | |||
| communication devices for more than 20 years, primarily carrying | communication devices for more than 20 years, primarily carrying | |||
| voice for cordless telephony but has also been deployed for data | voice for cordless telephony but has also been deployed for data | |||
| centric services. | centric services. | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 10 ¶ | |||
| 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 March 18, 2016. | This Internet-Draft will expire on August 29, 2016. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2016 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.1. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.1. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.2. Terms Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.2. Terms Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2. DECT Ultra Low Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2. DECT Ultra Low Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2.1. The DECT ULE Protocol Stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.1. The DECT ULE Protocol Stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2.2. Link layer roles and topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.2. Link layer roles and topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 2.3. Addressing Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.3. Addressing Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.4. MTU Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.4. MTU Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.5. Additional Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.5. Additional Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 3. Specification of IPv6 over DECT ULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3. Specification of IPv6 over DECT ULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 3.1. Protocol stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 3.1. Protocol stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3.2. Link model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 3.2. Link model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3.3. Subnets and Internet connectivity scenarios . . . . . . . 13 | 3.3. Subnets and Internet connectivity scenarios . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 6. ETSI Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 6. ETSI Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| DECT Ultra Low Energy (DECT ULE or just ULE) is an air interface | DECT Ultra Low Energy (DECT ULE or just ULE) is an air interface | |||
| technology building on the key fundamentals of traditional DECT / | technology building on the key fundamentals of traditional DECT / | |||
| CAT-iq but with specific changes to significantly reduce the power | CAT-iq but with specific changes to significantly reduce the power | |||
| consumption at the expense of data throughput. DECT ULE devices with | consumption at the expense of data throughput. DECT (Digital | |||
| requirements on power consumption will operate on special power | Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications) is a standard series | |||
| optimized silicon, but can connect to a DECT Gateway supporting | [EN300.175-part1-7] specificed by ETSI and CAT-iq (Cordless Advanced | |||
| Technology - internet and quality) is a set of product certication | ||||
| and interoperability profiles [CAT-iq] defined by DECT Forum. DECT | ||||
| ULE devices with requirements on power consumption as specified by | ||||
| ETSI in [TS102.939-1] and [TS102.939-2], will operate on special | ||||
| power optimized silicon, but can connect to a DECT Gateway supporting | ||||
| traditional DECT / CAT-iq for cordless telephony and data as well as | traditional DECT / CAT-iq for cordless telephony and data as well as | |||
| the ULE extensions. DECT terminology operates with two major role | the ULE extensions. DECT terminology operates with two major role | |||
| definitions: The Portable Part (PP) is the power constrained device, | definitions: The Portable Part (PP) is the power constrained device, | |||
| while the Fixed Part (FP) is the Gateway or base station. This FP | while the Fixed Part (FP) is the Gateway or base station. This FP | |||
| may be connected to the Internet. An example of a use case for DECT | may be connected to the Internet. An example of a use case for DECT | |||
| ULE is a home security sensor transmitting small amounts of data (few | ULE is a home security sensor transmitting small amounts of data (few | |||
| bytes) at periodic intervals through the FP, but is able to wake up | bytes) at periodic intervals through the FP, but is able to wake up | |||
| upon an external event (burglar) and communicate with the FP. | upon an external event (burglar) and communicate with the FP. | |||
| Another example incorporating both DECT ULE as well as traditional | Another example incorporating both DECT ULE as well as traditional | |||
| CAT-iq telephony is an elderly pendant (broche) which can transmit | CAT-iq telephony is an elderly pendant (broche) which can transmit | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 40 ¶ | |||
| establish a voice connection through the pendant to an alarm service. | establish a voice connection through the pendant to an alarm service. | |||
| It is expected that DECT ULE will be integrated into many residential | It is expected that DECT ULE will be integrated into many residential | |||
| gateways, as many of these already implements DECT CAT-iq for | gateways, as many of these already implements DECT CAT-iq for | |||
| cordless telephony. DECT ULE can be added as a software option for | cordless telephony. DECT ULE can be added as a software option for | |||
| the FP. It is desirable to consider IPv6 for DECT ULE devices due to | the FP. It is desirable to consider IPv6 for DECT ULE devices due to | |||
| the large address space and well-known infrastructure. This document | the large address space and well-known infrastructure. This document | |||
| describes how IPv6 is used on DECT ULE links to optimize power while | describes how IPv6 is used on DECT ULE links to optimize power while | |||
| maintaining the many benefits of IPv6 transmission. [RFC4944], | maintaining the many benefits of IPv6 transmission. [RFC4944], | |||
| [RFC6282] and [RFC6775] specify the transmission of IPv6 over IEEE | [RFC6282] and [RFC6775] specify the transmission of IPv6 over IEEE | |||
| 802.15.4. DECT ULE has many characteristics similar to those of IEEE | 802.15.4. DECT ULE has many characteristics similar to those of IEEE | |||
| 802.15.4, but also differences. Many of the mechanisms defined for | 802.15.4, but also differences. A subset of mechanisms defined for | |||
| transmission of IPv6 over IEEE 802.15.4 can be applied to the | transmission of IPv6 over IEEE 802.15.4 can be applied to the | |||
| transmission of IPv6 on DECT ULE links. | transmission of IPv6 on DECT ULE links. | |||
| This document specifies how to map IPv6 over DECT ULE inspired by | This document specifies how to map IPv6 over DECT ULE inspired by | |||
| [RFC4944], [RFC6282], [RFC6775] and [I-D.ietf-6lo-btle]. | [RFC4944], [RFC6282], [RFC6775] and [RFC7668]. | |||
| 1.1. Requirements Notation | 1.1. Requirements Notation | |||
| 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]. | |||
| 1.2. Terms Used | 1.2. Terms Used | |||
| PP: DECT Portable Part, typically the sensor node | 6CO: 6LoWPAN Context Option [RFC6775] | |||
| 6LBR: DECT Fixed Part having a role as defined in [RFC6775] | ||||
| FP: DECT Fixed Part, the gateway | 6LN: DECT Portable part having a role as defined in [RFC6775] | |||
| LLME: Lower Layer Management Entity | 6LoWPAN: IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Network | |||
| AES128: Advanced Encryption Standard with key size of 128 bits | ||||
| RFPI: Radio Fixed Part Identity | API: Application Programming Interface | |||
| ARO: Address Registration Option [RFC6775] | ||||
| IPEI: International Portable Equipment Identity | CAT-iq: Corless Advanced Technologi - internet and quality | |||
| CID: Context Identifier [RFC6775] | ||||
| TPUI: Temporary Portable User Identity | DAC: Destination Address Compression | |||
| DAM: Destination Address Mode | ||||
| PMID: Portable MAC Identity | DHCPv6: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 [RFC3315] | |||
| DLC: Data Link Control | ||||
| PVC: Permanent Virtual Circuit | DSAA2: DECT Standard Authentication Algorithm #2 | |||
| DSC: DECT Standard Cipher | ||||
| 6LN: DECT Portable part having a role as defined in [RFC6775] | DSC2: DECT Standard Cipher #2 | |||
| FDMA: Frequency Division Multiplex | ||||
| 6LBR: DECT Fixed Part having a role as defined in [RFC6775] | FP: DECT Fixed Part, the gateway | |||
| GAP: Generic Access Profile | ||||
| IID: Interface Identifier | ||||
| IPEI: International Portable Equipment Identity; (DECT identity) | ||||
| MAC-48: 48 bit global unique MAC address managed by IEEE | ||||
| MAC: Media Access Control | ||||
| MTU: Maximum Transmission Unit | ||||
| ND: Neighbor Discovery [RFC4861] [RFC6775] | ||||
| PDU: Protocol Data Unit | ||||
| PHY: Physical Layer | ||||
| PMID: Portable MAC Identity; (DECT identity) | ||||
| PP: DECT Portable Part, typically the sensor node (6LN) | ||||
| PVC: Permanent Virtual Circuit | ||||
| RFPI: Radio Fixed Part Identity; (DECT identity) | ||||
| SAC: Source Address Compression | ||||
| SAM: Source Address Mode | ||||
| TDD: Time Division Duplex | ||||
| TDMA: Time Division Multiplex | ||||
| TPUI: Temporary Portable User Identity; (DECT identity) | ||||
| UAK: User Authentication Key, DECT master security key | ||||
| ULA: Unique Local Address [RFC4193] | ||||
| 2. DECT Ultra Low Energy | 2. DECT Ultra Low Energy | |||
| DECT ULE is a low power air interface technology that is designed to | DECT ULE is a low power air interface technology that is designed to | |||
| support both circuit switched for service, such as voice | support both circuit switched for service, such as voice | |||
| communication, and for packet mode data services at modest data rate. | communication, and for packet mode data services at modest data rate. | |||
| This draft is only addressing the packet mode data service of DECT | This draft is only addressing the packet mode data service of DECT | |||
| ULE. | ULE. | |||
| 2.1. The DECT ULE Protocol Stack | 2.1. The DECT ULE Protocol Stack | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 51 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 28 ¶ | |||
| The DECT ULE device can switch to the ULE mode of operation, | The DECT ULE device can switch to the ULE mode of operation, | |||
| utilizing the new ULE MAC layer features. The DECT ULE Data Link | utilizing the new ULE MAC layer features. The DECT ULE Data Link | |||
| Control (DLC) provides multiplexing as well as segmentation and re- | Control (DLC) provides multiplexing as well as segmentation and re- | |||
| assembly for larger packets from layers above. The DECT ULE layer | assembly for larger packets from layers above. The DECT ULE layer | |||
| also implements per-message authentication and encryption. The DLC | also implements per-message authentication and encryption. The DLC | |||
| layer ensures packet integrity and preserves packet order, but | layer ensures packet integrity and preserves packet order, but | |||
| delivery is based on best effort. | delivery is based on best effort. | |||
| The current DECT ULE MAC layer standard supports low bandwidth data | The current DECT ULE MAC layer standard supports low bandwidth data | |||
| broadcast. However the usage of this broadcast service has not yet | broadcast. However, this document is not considering usage of the | |||
| been standardized for higher layers. This document is not | DECT ULE MAC layer broadcast service. | |||
| considering usage of this DECT ULE MAC broadcast service in current | ||||
| version. | ||||
| In general, communication sessions can be initiated from both FP and | In general, communication sessions can be initiated from both FP and | |||
| PP side. Depending on power down modes employed in the PP, latency | PP side. Depending on power down modes employed in the PP, latency | |||
| may occur when initiating sessions from FP side. MAC layer | may occur when initiating sessions from FP side. MAC layer | |||
| communication can take place using either connection oriented packet | communication can take place using either connection oriented packet | |||
| transfer with low overhead for short sessions or take place using | transfer with low overhead for short sessions or take place using | |||
| connection oriented bearers including media reservation. The MAC | connection oriented bearers including media reservation. The MAC | |||
| layer autonomously selects the radio spectrum positions that are | layer autonomously selects the radio spectrum positions that are | |||
| available within the band and can rearrange these to avoid | available within the band and can rearrange these to avoid | |||
| interference. The MAC layer has built-in retransmission procedures | interference. The MAC layer has built-in retransmission procedures | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 6 ¶ | |||
| Programmers Interface (API) as well as common elements known as | Programmers Interface (API) as well as common elements known as | |||
| Generic Access Profile (GAP) for enrolling into the network. The | Generic Access Profile (GAP) for enrolling into the network. The | |||
| DECT ULE stack establishes a permanent virtual circuit (PVC) for the | DECT ULE stack establishes a permanent virtual circuit (PVC) for the | |||
| application layers and provides support for a range of different | application layers and provides support for a range of different | |||
| application protocols. The used application protocol is negotiated | application protocols. The used application protocol is negotiated | |||
| between the PP and FP when the PVC communication service is | between the PP and FP when the PVC communication service is | |||
| established. This draft defines 6LoWPAN as one of the possible | established. This draft defines 6LoWPAN as one of the possible | |||
| protocols to negotiate. | protocols to negotiate. | |||
| +----------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------------+ | |||
| | Applications | | | Application Layers | | |||
| +----------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------------+ | |||
| | Generic Access | ULE Profile | | | Generic Access | ULE Profile | | |||
| | Profile | | | | Profile | | | |||
| +----------------------------------------+ | +----------------------------------------+ | |||
| | DECT/Service API | ULE Data API | | | DECT/Service API | ULE Data API | | |||
| +--------------------+-------------------+ | +--------------------+-------------------+ | |||
| | LLME | NWK (MM,CC)| | | | LLME | NWK (MM,CC)| | | |||
| +--------------------+-------------------+ | +--------------------+-------------------+ | |||
| | DECT DLC | DECT ULE DLC | | | DECT DLC | DECT ULE DLC | | |||
| +--------------------+-------------------+ | +--------------------+-------------------+ | |||
| | MAC Layer | | | MAC Layer | | |||
| +--------------------+-------------------+ | +--------------------+-------------------+ | |||
| | Physical Layer | | | PHY Layer | | |||
| +--------------------+-------------------+ | +--------------------+-------------------+ | |||
| (C-plane) (U-plane) | (C-plane) (U-plane) | |||
| Figure 1: DECT ULE Protocol Stack | Figure 1: DECT ULE Protocol Stack | |||
| The DECT ULE stack can be divided into control (C-plane) and user- | Figure 1 above shows the DECT ULE Stack divided into the Control- | |||
| data (U-plane) parts shown to the left and to the right in figure 1, | plane and User-data path, to left and to the right, respectively. | |||
| respectively. | The shown entities in the Stack are the (PHY) Physical Layer, (MAC) | |||
| Media Access Control Layer, (DLC) Data Link Control Layer, (NWK) | ||||
| Network Layer with subcomponents: (LLME) Lower Layer Management | ||||
| Entity, (MM) Mobility Management and (CC) Call Control. Aboves there | ||||
| are the typically (API) Application Programmers Interface and | ||||
| application profile specific layers. | ||||
| 2.2. Link layer roles and topology | 2.2. Link layer roles and topology | |||
| A FP is assumed to be less constrained than a PP. Hence, in the | A FP is assumed to be less constrained than a PP. Hence, in the | |||
| primary scenario FP and PP will act as 6LBR and a 6LN, respectively. | primary scenario FP and PP will act as 6LBR and a 6LN, respectively. | |||
| This document does only address this primary scenario. | This document does only address this primary scenario. | |||
| In DECT ULE, at link layer the communication only takes place between | In DECT ULE, at link layer the communication only takes place between | |||
| a FP and a PP. A FP is able to handle multiple simultaneous | a FP and a PP. A FP is able to handle multiple simultaneous | |||
| connections with a number of PP. Hence, in a DECT ULE network using | connections with a number of PP. Hence, in a DECT ULE network using | |||
| IPv6, a radio hop is equivalent to an IPv6 link and vice versa. | IPv6, a radio hop is equivalent to an IPv6 link and vice versa. | |||
| [DECT ULE PP]-----\ /-----[DECT ULE PP] | [DECT ULE PP]-----\ /-----[DECT ULE PP] | |||
| \ / | \ / | |||
| [DECT ULE PP]-------+[DECT ULE FP]+-------[DECT ULE PP] | [DECT ULE PP]-------+[DECT ULE FP]+-------[DECT ULE PP] | |||
| / \ | / \ | |||
| [DECT ULE PP]-----/ \-----[DECT ULE PP] | [DECT ULE PP]-----/ \-----[DECT ULE PP] | |||
| Figure 2: DECT ULE star topology | Figure 2: DECT ULE star topology | |||
| A significant difference between IEEE 802.15.4 and DECT ULE is that | ||||
| the former supports both star and mesh topology (and requires a | ||||
| routing protocol), whereas DECT ULE in it's primary configuration | ||||
| does not support the formation of multihop networks at the link | ||||
| layer. In consequence, the mesh header defined in [RFC4944] for mesh | ||||
| under routing are not used in DECT ULE networks. | ||||
| DECT ULE repeaters are not considered in this document. | DECT ULE repeaters are not considered in this document. | |||
| 2.3. Addressing Model | 2.3. Addressing Model | |||
| Each DECT PP is assigned an IPEI during manufacturing. This identity | Each DECT PP is assigned an IPEI during manufacturing. This identity | |||
| has the size of 40 bits and is DECT globally unique for the PP and | has the size of 40 bits and is DECT globally unique for the PP and | |||
| can be used to constitute the MAC address. However, it cannot be | can be used to constitute the MAC address. However, it cannot be | |||
| used to derive a globally unique IID. | used to derive a globally unique IID. | |||
| When bound to a FP, a PP is assigned a 20 bit TPUI which is unique | When bound to a FP, a PP is assigned a 20 bit TPUI which is unique | |||
| within the FP. This TPUI is used for addressing (layer 2) in | within the FP. This TPUI is used for addressing (layer 2) in | |||
| messages between FP and PP. | messages between FP and PP. | |||
| Each DECT FP is assigned a RFPI during manufacturing. This identity | Each DECT FP is assigned a RFPI during manufacturing. This identity | |||
| has the size of 40 bits and is globally unique for a FP and can be | has the size of 40 bits and is globally unique for a FP and can be | |||
| used to constitute the MAC address. However, it cannot be used to | used to constitute the MAC address used to derive the IID for link- | |||
| derive a globally unique IID. | local address. However, it cannot be used to derive a globally | |||
| unique IID. | ||||
| Alternatively each DECT PP and DECT FP can be assigned a unique | Optionally each DECT PP and DECT FP can be assigned a unique (IEEE) | |||
| (IEEE) MAC-48 address additionally to the DECT identities to be used | MAC-48 address additionally to the DECT identities to be used by the | |||
| by the 6LoWPAN. With such an approach, the FP and PP have to | 6LoWPAN. During the address registration of non-link-local addresses | |||
| implement a mapping between used MAC-48 addresses and DECT | as specified by this document, the FP and PP can use such MAC-48 to | |||
| identities. | construct the IID. | |||
| 2.4. MTU Considerations | 2.4. MTU Considerations | |||
| Generally the DECT ULE FP and PP may be generating data that fits | Idially the DECT ULE FP and PP may generate data that fits into a | |||
| into a single MAC Layer packet (38 octets) for periodically | single MAC Layer packets (38 octets) for periodically transferred | |||
| transferred information, depending on application. IP data packets | information, depending on application. However, IP packets may be | |||
| may be much larger and hence MTU size should be the size of the IP | much larger. The DECT ULE DLC procedures supports segmentation and | |||
| data packet. The DECT ULE DLC procedures supports segmentation and | reassembly of any MTU size below 65536 octets, but the default MTU | |||
| reassembly of any MTU size below 65536 octets, but most | size defined in DECT ULE [TS102.939-1] is 500 octets. In order to | |||
| implementations do only support smaller values. The default MTU size | support complete IP packets, the DLC layer of DECT ULE SHALL per this | |||
| in DECT ULE is 500 octets, but it SHALL be configured to fit the | specification be configured with a MTU size that fits the | |||
| requirements from IPv6 data packets, hence [RFC4944] fragmentation/ | requirements from IPv6 data packets, hence [RFC4944] fragmentation/ | |||
| reassembly is not required. | reassembly is not required. | |||
| It is expected that the LOWPAN_IPHC packet will fulfill all the | It is expected that the LOWPAN_IPHC packet will fulfill all the | |||
| requirements for header compression without spending unnecessary | requirements for header compression without spending unnecessary | |||
| overhead for mesh addressing. | overhead for mesh addressing. | |||
| It is important to realize that the usage of larger packets will be | It is important to realize that the usage of larger packets will be | |||
| at the expense of battery life, as a large packet inside the DECT ULE | at the expense of battery life, as a large packet inside the DECT ULE | |||
| stack will be fragmented into several or many MAC layer packets, each | stack will be fragmented into several or many MAC layer packets, each | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 48 ¶ | |||
| consumption and thus limits the allowed protocol overhead. 6LoWPAN | consumption and thus limits the allowed protocol overhead. 6LoWPAN | |||
| standards [RFC4944], [RFC6775], and [RFC6282] provide useful | standards [RFC4944], [RFC6775], and [RFC6282] provide useful | |||
| functionality for reducing overhead which can be applied to DECT ULE. | functionality for reducing overhead which can be applied to DECT ULE. | |||
| This functionality comprises link-local IPv6 addresses and stateless | This functionality comprises link-local IPv6 addresses and stateless | |||
| IPv6 address autoconfiguration, Neighbor Discovery and header | IPv6 address autoconfiguration, Neighbor Discovery and header | |||
| compression. | compression. | |||
| The ULE 6LoWPAN adaptation layer can run directly on this U-plane DLC | The ULE 6LoWPAN adaptation layer can run directly on this U-plane DLC | |||
| layer. Figure 3 illustrates IPv6 over DECT ULE stack. | layer. Figure 3 illustrates IPv6 over DECT ULE stack. | |||
| A significant difference between IEEE 802.15.4 and DECT ULE is that | As consequence of DECT ULE in it's primary configuration does not | |||
| the former supports both star and mesh topology (and requires a | support the formation of multihop networks at the link layer, the | |||
| routing protocol), whereas DECT ULE in it's primary configuration | mesh header defined in [RFC4944] for mesh under routing MUST NOT be | |||
| does not support the formation of multihop networks at the link | used. In addition, a DECT ULE PP node MUST NOT play the role of a | |||
| layer. In consequence, the mesh header defined in [RFC4944] for mesh | 6LoWPAN Router (6LR). | |||
| under routing MUST NOT be used in DECT ULE networks. In addition, a | ||||
| DECT ULE PP node MUST NOT play the role of a 6LoWPAN Router (6LR). | ||||
| 3.1. Protocol stack | 3.1. Protocol stack | |||
| In order to enable transmission of IPv6 packets over DECT ULE, a | In order to enable transmission of IPv6 packets over DECT ULE, a | |||
| Permanent Virtual Circuit (PVC) has to be opened between FP and PP. | Permanent Virtual Circuit (PVC) has to be opened between FP and PP. | |||
| This MUST be done by setting up a service call from PP to FP. The PP | This MUST be done by setting up a service call from PP to FP. The PP | |||
| SHALL specify the <<IWU-ATTRIBUTES>> in a service-change (other) | SHALL specify the <<IWU-ATTRIBUTES>> in a service-change (other) | |||
| message before sending a service-change (resume) message as defined | message before sending a service-change (resume) message as defined | |||
| in [TS102.939-1]. The <<IWU-ATTRIBTES>> SHALL define the ULE | in [TS102.939-1]. The <<IWU-ATTRIBTES>> SHALL define the ULE | |||
| Application Protocol Identifier to 0x06 and the MTU size to 1280 | Application Protocol Identifier to 0x06 and the MTU size to 1280 | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 39 ¶ | |||
| | DECT ULE MAC | | | DECT ULE MAC | | |||
| +-------------------+ | +-------------------+ | |||
| | DECT ULE PHY | | | DECT ULE PHY | | |||
| +-------------------+ | +-------------------+ | |||
| Figure 3: IPv6 over DECT ULE Stack | Figure 3: IPv6 over DECT ULE Stack | |||
| 3.2. Link model | 3.2. Link model | |||
| The general model is that IPv6 is layer 3 and DECT ULE MAC+DLC is | The general model is that IPv6 is layer 3 and DECT ULE MAC+DLC is | |||
| layer 2. The DECT ULE implements fragmentation and reassembly | layer 2. The DECT ULE implements already fragmentation and | |||
| functionality and [RFC4944] fragmentation and reassembly function | reassembly functionality, hence [RFC4944] fragmentation and | |||
| MUST NOT be used. Since IPv6 requires MTU size of at least 1280 | reassembly function MUST NOT be used. The DECT ULE DLC link (PVC) | |||
| octets, the DECT ULE connection (PVC) MUST be configured with | MUST be configured with a minimum MTU size of at least 1280 octers in | |||
| equivalent MTU size. | order to meet the size requirements of IPv6. | |||
| Per this specification, the IPv6 header compression format specified | Per this specification, the IPv6 header compression format specified | |||
| in [RFC6282] MUST be used. The IPv6 payload length can be derived | in [RFC6282] MUST be used. The IPv6 payload length can be derived | |||
| from the ULE DLC packet length and the possibly elided IPv6 address | from the ULE DLC packet length and the possibly elided IPv6 address | |||
| can be reconstructed from the link-layer address, used at the time of | can be reconstructed from the link-layer address, used at the time of | |||
| DECT ULE connection establishment, from the ULE MAC packet address, | DECT ULE connection establishment, from the ULE MAC packet address, | |||
| compression context if any, and from address registration information | compression context if any, and from address registration information | |||
| (see Section 3.2.2). | (see Section 3.2.2). | |||
| Due to DECT ULE star topology, each branch of the star is considered | Due to DECT ULE star topology, each branch of the star is considered | |||
| to be an individual link and thus the PPs cannot directly hear one | to be an individual link and thus the PPs cannot directly hear one | |||
| another and cannot talk to one another with link-local addresses. | another and cannot talk to one another with link-local addresses. | |||
| However, the FP acts as a 6LBR for communication between the PPs. | However, the FP acts as a 6LBR for communication between the PPs. | |||
| After the FP and PPs have connected at the DECT ULE level, the link | After the FP and PPs have connected at the DECT ULE level, the link | |||
| can be considered up and IPv6 address configuration and transmission | can be considered up and IPv6 address configuration and transmission | |||
| can begin. The FP ensures address collisions do not occur. | can begin. The FP ensures address collisions do not occur. | |||
| 3.2.1. Stateless address autoconfiguration | 3.2.1. Stateless address autoconfiguration | |||
| A DECT ULE 6LN performs stateless address autoconfiguration as per | At network interface initialization, both 6LN and 6LBR SHALL generate | |||
| [RFC4862]. Following the guidance of [RFC7136], a 64-bit Interface | and assign to the DECT ULE network interface IPv6 link-local | |||
| identifier (IID) for a DECT ULE interface MAY be formed by utilizing | addresses [RFC4862] based on the DECT device addresses (see | |||
| a MAC-48 device address as defined in [RFC2464] "IPv6 over Ethernet" | Section 2.3) that were used for establishing the underlying DECT ULE | |||
| specification. | connection. | |||
| Alternatively, the DECT device addresses IPEI, RFPI or TPUI, MAY be | The DECT device addresses IPEI and RFPI MUST be used to derive the | |||
| used instead to derive the IID. These DECT devices addresses | IPv6 link-local 64 bit Interface Identifiers (IID) for 6LN and 6LBR, | |||
| consisting of 40, 40 and 20 bits respectively, MUST be expanded with | respectively. | |||
| leading bits to form a 48 bit address. Least significant bit of this | ||||
| address is the last bit in network order. The expanded leading bits | ||||
| are all zeros except for 7th bit indicating not global unique. First | ||||
| bit is set to a one for addresses derived from the RFPI and 2nd bit | ||||
| is set to one when the address is derived from the PMID. For example | ||||
| from IPEI=01.23.45.67.89 is derived MAC address equal | ||||
| 02:01:23:45:67:89 and from PMID=0.01.23 is derived MAC address equal | ||||
| 42:00:00:00:01:23. | ||||
| As defined in [RFC4291], the IPv6 link-local address for a DECT ULE | The rule for deriving IID from DECT device addresses is as follows: | |||
| node is formed by appending the IID, to the prefix FE80::/64, as | The DECT device addresses that are consisting of 40 bits each, MUST | |||
| shown in Figure 4. | be expanded with leading zero bits to form 48 bit intermediate | |||
| addresses. Least significant bit of this address is the last bit in | ||||
| network order. First bit is set to a one for addresses derived from | ||||
| the RFPI and first bit is set to zero for addresses derived from the | ||||
| IPEI. From these intermediate 48 bit addresses are derived 64 bit | ||||
| IIDs accordig to the guidance of [RFC4291]. In the derived IIDs the | ||||
| 7th bit is set to one to indicate that the addresses are not global | ||||
| unique. For example from RFPI=11.22.33.44.55 the derived IID is | ||||
| 82:11:22:FF:FE:33:44:55 and from IPEI=01.23.45.67.89 the derived IID | ||||
| is 02:01:23:FF:FE:45:67:89. | ||||
| As defined in [RFC4291], the IPv6 link-local address is formed by | ||||
| appending the IID, to the prefix FE80::/64, as shown in Figure 4. | ||||
| 10 bits 54 bits 64 bits | 10 bits 54 bits 64 bits | |||
| +----------+-----------------+----------------------+ | +----------+-----------------+----------------------+ | |||
| |1111111010| zeros | Interface Identifier | | |1111111010| zeros | Interface Identifier | | |||
| +----------+-----------------+----------------------+ | +----------+-----------------+----------------------+ | |||
| Figure 4: IPv6 link-local address in DECT ULE | Figure 4: IPv6 link-local address in DECT ULE | |||
| A 6LN MUST join the all-nodes multicast address. | A 6LN MUST join the all-nodes multicast address. | |||
| After link-local address configuration, 6LN sends Router Solicitation | After link-local address configuration, 6LN sends Router Solicitation | |||
| messages as described in [RFC4861] Section 6.3.7. | messages as described in [RFC4861] Section 6.3.7. | |||
| For non-link-local addresses a 64-bit IID MAY be formed by utilizing | For non-link-local addresses, 6LNs SHOULD NOT be configured to use | |||
| a MAC-48 device address. For non-link-local addresses, 6LNs SHOULD | IIDs derived from a MAC-48 device address or DECT device addresses. | |||
| NOT be configured to use IIDs derived from a MAC-48 device address. | Alternative schemes such as Cryptographically Generated Addresses | |||
| By default a 6LN SHOULD use a randomly generated IID (see | (CGAs) [RFC3972], privacy extensions [RFC4941], Hash-Based Addresses | |||
| Section 3.2.2), for example, as discussed in [I-D.ietf-6man-default- | (HBAs) [RFC5535], DHCPv6 [RFC3315], or static, semantically opaque | |||
| iids], or use alternative schemes such as Cryptographically Generated | addresses [RFC7217] SHOULD be used by default. In situations where | |||
| Addresses (CGA) [RFC3972], privacy extensions [RFC4941], Hash-Based | the devices address embedded in the IID are required to support | |||
| Addresses (HBA, [RFC5535]), DHCPv6 [RFC3315], or static, semantically | deployment constraints, 6LN MAY form a 64-bit IID by utilizing the | |||
| opaque addresses [RFC7217]. In situations where the devices address | MAC-48 device address or DECT device addresses. The non-link-local | |||
| embedded in the IID are required to support deployment constraints, | addresses 6LN generates MUST be registered with 6LBR as described in | |||
| 6LN MAY form a 64-bit IID by utilizing the MAC-48 device address. | Section 3.2.2. | |||
| The non-link-local addresses 6LN generates MUST be registered with | ||||
| 6LBR as described in Section 3.2.2. | ||||
| The means for a 6LBR to obtain an IPv6 prefix for numbering the DECT | The means for a 6LBR to obtain an IPv6 prefix for numbering the DECT | |||
| ULE network is out of scope of this document, but can be, for | ULE network is out of scope of this document, but can be, for | |||
| example, accomplished via DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation [RFC3633] or by | example, accomplished via DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation [RFC3633] or by | |||
| using Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (ULA) [RFC4193]. Due to | using Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (ULA) [RFC4193]. Due to | |||
| the link model of the DECT ULE the 6LBR MUST set the "on-link" flag | the link model of the DECT ULE the 6LBR MUST set the "on-link" flag | |||
| (L) to zero in the Prefix Information Option [RFC4861]. This will | (L) to zero in the Prefix Information Option [RFC4861]. This will | |||
| cause 6LNs to always send packets to the 6LBR, including the case | cause 6LNs to always send packets to the 6LBR, including the case | |||
| when the destination is another 6LN using the same prefix. | when the destination is another 6LN using the same prefix. | |||
| A 6LN MUST NOT register more than one non-link-local addres on the | ||||
| same prefix. | ||||
| 3.2.2. Neighbor discovery | 3.2.2. Neighbor discovery | |||
| 'Neighbor Discovery Optimization for IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless | 'Neighbor Discovery Optimization for IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless | |||
| Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)' [RFC6775] describes the neighbor | Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)' [RFC6775] describes the neighbor | |||
| discovery approach as adapted for use in several 6LoWPAN topologies, | discovery approach as adapted for use in several 6LoWPAN topologies, | |||
| including the mesh topology. As DECT ULE is considered not to | including the mesh topology. As DECT ULE is considered not to | |||
| support mesh networks, hence only those aspects that apply to a star | support mesh networks, hence only those aspects that apply to a star | |||
| topology are considered. | topology are considered. | |||
| The following aspects of the Neighbor Discovery optimizations | The following aspects of the Neighbor Discovery optimizations | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 43 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 35 ¶ | |||
| needs to transmit an IPv6 multicast packet, the 6LN will unicast the | needs to transmit an IPv6 multicast packet, the 6LN will unicast the | |||
| corresponding DECT ULE packet to the 6LBR. The 6LBR will then | corresponding DECT ULE packet to the 6LBR. The 6LBR will then | |||
| forward the multicast packet to other 6LNs. | forward the multicast packet to other 6LNs. | |||
| 3.2.4. Header Compression | 3.2.4. Header Compression | |||
| Header compression as defined in [RFC6282], which specifies the | Header compression as defined in [RFC6282], which specifies the | |||
| compression format for IPv6 datagrams on top of IEEE 802.15.4, is | compression format for IPv6 datagrams on top of IEEE 802.15.4, is | |||
| REQUIRED in this document as the basis for IPv6 header compression on | REQUIRED in this document as the basis for IPv6 header compression on | |||
| top of DECT ULE. All headers MUST be compressed according to | top of DECT ULE. All headers MUST be compressed according to | |||
| [RFC6282] encoding formats. The DECT ULE's star topology structure | [RFC6282] encoding formats. The DECT ULE's star topology structure, | |||
| and ARO can be exploited in order to provide a mechanism for addess | ARO and 6CO can be exploited in order to provide a mechanism for | |||
| compression. The following text describes the principles of IPv6 | address compression. The following text describes the principles of | |||
| address compression on top of DECT ULE. | IPv6 address compression on top of DECT ULE. | |||
| 3.2.4.1. Link-local Header Compression | 3.2.4.1. Link-local Header Compression | |||
| In a link-local communication terminated at 6LN and 6LBR, both the | In a link-local communication terminated at 6LN and 6LBR, both the | |||
| IPv6 source and destination addresses MUST be elided, since the node | IPv6 source and destination addresses MUST be elided, since the used | |||
| knows that the packet is destined for it even if the packet does not | IIDs map uniquely into the DECT link end point addresses. A 6LN or | |||
| have destination IPv6 address. A node SHALL learn the IID of the | 6LBR that receives a PDU containing an IPv6 packet can infer the | |||
| other endpoint of each DECT ULE connection it participates in. By | corresponding IPv6 source address. For the type of communication | |||
| exploiting this information, a node that receives a PDU containing an | considered in this paragraph, the following settings MUST be used in | |||
| IPv6 packet can infer the corresponding IPv6 source address. A node | the IPv6 compressed header: CID=0, SAC=0, SAM=11, DAC=0, DAM=11. | |||
| MUST maintain a Neighbor Cache, in which the entries include both the | ||||
| IID of the neighbor and the Device Address that identifies the | ||||
| neighbor. For the type of communication considered in this | ||||
| paragraph, the following settings MUST be used in the IPv6 compressed | ||||
| header: CID=0, SAC=0, SAM=11, DAC=0, DAM=11. | ||||
| 3.2.4.2. Non-link-local Header Compression | 3.2.4.2. Non-link-local Header Compression | |||
| To enable efficient header compression, the 6LBR MUST include 6LoWPAN | To enable efficient header compression, the 6LBR MUST include 6LoWPAN | |||
| Context Option (6CO) [RFC6775] for all prefixes the 6LBR advertises | Context Option (6CO) [RFC6775] for all prefixes the 6LBR advertises | |||
| in Router Advertisements for use in stateless address | in Router Advertisements for use in stateless address | |||
| autoconfiguration. | autoconfiguration. | |||
| When a 6LN transmits an IPv6 packet to a destination using global | When a 6LN transmits an IPv6 packet to a destination using global | |||
| Unicast IPv6 addresses, if a context is defined for the prefix of the | Unicast IPv6 addresses, if a context is defined for the prefix of the | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 5 ¶ | |||
| SAM=11. | SAM=11. | |||
| 3.3. Subnets and Internet connectivity scenarios | 3.3. Subnets and Internet connectivity scenarios | |||
| In a typical scenario, the DECT ULE network is connected to the | In a typical scenario, the DECT ULE network is connected to the | |||
| Internet as shown in the Figure 5. In this scenario, the DECT ULE | Internet as shown in the Figure 5. In this scenario, the DECT ULE | |||
| network is deployed as one subnet, using one /64 IPv6 prefix. The | network is deployed as one subnet, using one /64 IPv6 prefix. The | |||
| 6LBR is acting as router and forwarding packets between 6LNs and to | 6LBR is acting as router and forwarding packets between 6LNs and to | |||
| and from Internet. | and from Internet. | |||
| A degenerate scenario can be imagined where a PP is acting as 6LBR | Other scenarios can be imagined where a PP is acting as 6LBR and | |||
| and providing Internet connectivity for the FP. How the FP could | providing Internet connectivity for the FP. How the FP could then | |||
| then further provide Internet connectivity to other PP, possibly | further provide Internet connectivity to other PP, possibly connected | |||
| connected to the FP, is out of the scope of this document. | to the FP, is out of the scope of this document. | |||
| 6LN | 6LN | |||
| \ ____________ | \ ____________ | |||
| \ / \ | \ / \ | |||
| 6LN ---- 6LBR --- | Internet | | 6LN ---- 6LBR --- | Internet | | |||
| / \____________/ | / \____________/ | |||
| / | / | |||
| 6LN | 6LN | |||
| <-- DECT ULE --> | <-- DECT ULE --> | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 12 ¶ | |||
| different PP, the FP has to act as 6LBR, number the network with ULA | different PP, the FP has to act as 6LBR, number the network with ULA | |||
| prefix [RFC4193], and route packets between PP. | prefix [RFC4193], and route packets between PP. | |||
| 4. IANA Considerations | 4. IANA Considerations | |||
| There are no IANA considerations related to this document. | There are no IANA considerations related to this document. | |||
| 5. Security Considerations | 5. Security Considerations | |||
| The secure transmission of speech over DECT will be based on the | The secure transmission of speech over DECT will be based on the | |||
| DSAA2 and DSC2 work developed by the DF Security group / ETSI TC DECT | DSAA2 and DSC/DSC2 specification developed by ETSI TC DECT and the | |||
| and the ETSI SAGE Security expert group. | ETSI SAGE Security expert group. | |||
| DECT ULE communications are secured at the link-layer (DLC) by | DECT ULE communications are secured at the link-layer (DLC) by | |||
| encryption and per-message authentication through CCM mode (Counter | encryption and per-message authentication through CCM mode (Counter | |||
| with CBC-MAC) similar to [RFC3610]. The underlying algorithm for | with CBC-MAC) similar to [RFC3610]. The underlying algorithm for | |||
| providing encryption and authentication is AES128. | providing encryption and authentication is AES128. | |||
| The DECT ULE pairing procedure generates a master authentication key | The DECT ULE pairing procedure generates a master authentication key | |||
| (UAK) and during location registration procedure or when the | (UAK). During location registration procedure or when the permanent | |||
| permanent virtual circuit are established, the session security keys | virtual circuit are established, the session security keys are | |||
| are generated. Session security keys may be renewed regularly. The | generated. Session security keys may be renewed regularly. The | |||
| generated security keys (UAK and session security keys) are | generated security keys (UAK and session security keys) are | |||
| individual for each FP-PP binding, hence all PP in a system have | individual for each FP-PP binding, hence all PP in a system have | |||
| different security keys. DECT ULE PPs do not use any shared | different security keys. DECT ULE PPs do not use any shared | |||
| encryption key. | encryption key. | |||
| The IPv6 address configuration as described in Section 3.2.1 allows | From privacy point of view, the IPv6 link-local address configuration | |||
| implementations the choice to support, for example, [I-D.ietf-6man- | described in Section 3.2.1 only reveals information about the 6LN to | |||
| default-iids], [RFC3315], [RFC3972], [RFC4941], [RFC5535] or | the 6LBR that the 6LBR already knows from the link-layer connection. | |||
| [RFC7217] for non-link-local addresses. | For non-link-local IPv6 addresses, by default a 6LN SHOULD use a | |||
| randomly generated IID, for example, as discussed in [I-D.ietf-6man- | ||||
| default- iids], or use alternative schemes such as Cryptographically | ||||
| Generated Addresses (CGA) [RFC3972], privacy extensions [RFC4941], | ||||
| Hash-Based Addresses (HBA, [RFC5535]), or static, semantically opaque | ||||
| addresses [RFC7217]. | ||||
| 6. ETSI Considerations | 6. ETSI Considerations | |||
| ETSI is standardizing a list of known application layer protocols | ETSI is standardizing a list of known application layer protocols | |||
| that can use the DECT ULE permanent virtual circuit packet data | that can use the DECT ULE permanent virtual circuit packet data | |||
| service. Each protocol is identified by a unique known identifier, | service. Each protocol is identified by a unique known identifier, | |||
| which is exchanged in the service-change procedure as defined in | which is exchanged in the service-change procedure as defined in | |||
| [TS102.939-1]. The IPv6/6LoWPAN as described in this document is | [TS102.939-1]. The IPv6/6LoWPAN as described in this document is | |||
| considered as an application layer protocol on top of DECT ULE. In | considered as an application layer protocol on top of DECT ULE. In | |||
| order to provide interoperability between 6LoWPAN / DECT ULE devices | order to provide interoperability between 6LoWPAN / DECT ULE devices | |||
| a common protocol identifier for 6LoWPAN is standardized by ETSI. | a common protocol identifier for 6LoWPAN is standardized by ETSI. | |||
| The ETSI DECT ULE Application Protocol Identifier is specified to | The ETSI DECT ULE Application Protocol Identifier is specified to | |||
| 0x06 for 6LoWPAN [TS102.939-1]. | 0x06 for 6LoWPAN [TS102.939-1]. | |||
| 7. Acknowledgements | 7. Acknowledgements | |||
| We are grateful to the members of the IETF 6lo working group; this | We are grateful to the members of the IETF 6lo working group; this | |||
| document borrows liberally from their work. | document borrows liberally from their work. | |||
| Ralph Droms has provided valuable feedback for this draft. | Ralph Droms and Samita Chakrabarti have provided valuable feedback | |||
| for this draft. | ||||
| 8. References | 8. References | |||
| 8.1. Normative References | 8.1. Normative References | |||
| [EN300.175-part1-7] | [EN300.175-part1-7] | |||
| ETSI, "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications | ETSI, "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications | |||
| (DECT); Common Interface (CI);", March 2015. | (DECT); Common Interface (CI);", March 2015, | |||
| <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/ | ||||
| etsi_en/300100_300199/30017501/02.06.01_60/ | ||||
| en_30017501v020601p.pdf>. | ||||
| [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, | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | |||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | |||
| [RFC2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet | [RFC2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet | |||
| Networks", RFC 2464, DOI 10.17487/RFC2464, December 1998, | Networks", RFC 2464, DOI 10.17487/RFC2464, December 1998, | |||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2464>. | <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2464>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 39 ¶ | |||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6775>. | <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6775>. | |||
| [RFC7136] Carpenter, B. and S. Jiang, "Significance of IPv6 | [RFC7136] Carpenter, B. and S. Jiang, "Significance of IPv6 | |||
| Interface Identifiers", RFC 7136, DOI 10.17487/RFC7136, | Interface Identifiers", RFC 7136, DOI 10.17487/RFC7136, | |||
| February 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7136>. | February 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7136>. | |||
| [TS102.939-1] | [TS102.939-1] | |||
| ETSI, "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications | ETSI, "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications | |||
| (DECT); Ultra Low Energy (ULE); Machine to Machine | (DECT); Ultra Low Energy (ULE); Machine to Machine | |||
| Communications; Part 1: Home Automation Network (phase | Communications; Part 1: Home Automation Network (phase | |||
| 1)", March 2015. | 1)", March 2015, <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/ | |||
| etsi_ts/102900_102999/10293901/01.02.01_60/ | ||||
| ts_10293901v010201p.pdf>. | ||||
| [TS102.939-2] | [TS102.939-2] | |||
| ETSI, "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications | ETSI, "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications | |||
| (DECT); Ultra Low Energy (ULE); Machine to Machine | (DECT); Ultra Low Energy (ULE); Machine to Machine | |||
| Communications; Part 2: Home Automation Network (phase | Communications; Part 2: Home Automation Network (phase | |||
| 2)", March 2015. | 2)", March 2015, <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/ | |||
| etsi_ts/102900_102999/10293902/01.01.01_60/ | ||||
| ts_10293902v010101p.pdf>. | ||||
| 8.2. Informative References | 8.2. Informative References | |||
| [I-D.ietf-6lo-btle] | [CAT-iq] DECT Forum, "Cordless Advanced Technology - internet and | |||
| Nieminen, J., Savolainen, T., Isomaki, M., Patil, B., | quality", January 2016, | |||
| Shelby, Z., and C. Gomez, "IPv6 over BLUETOOTH(R) Low | <http://www.dect.org/userfiles/Public/ | |||
| Energy", draft-ietf-6lo-btle-17 (work in progress), August | DF_CAT-iq%20Certification%20Overview.pdf>. | |||
| 2015. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-6man-default-iids] | ||||
| Gont, F., Cooper, A., Thaler, D., and S. LIU, | ||||
| "Recommendation on Stable IPv6 Interface Identifiers", | ||||
| draft-ietf-6man-default-iids-07 (work in progress), August | ||||
| 2015. | ||||
| [RFC3315] Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, | [RFC3315] Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, | |||
| C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol | C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol | |||
| for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, DOI 10.17487/RFC3315, July | for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, DOI 10.17487/RFC3315, July | |||
| 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3315>. | 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3315>. | |||
| [RFC3610] Whiting, D., Housley, R., and N. Ferguson, "Counter with | [RFC3610] Whiting, D., Housley, R., and N. Ferguson, "Counter with | |||
| CBC-MAC (CCM)", RFC 3610, DOI 10.17487/RFC3610, September | CBC-MAC (CCM)", RFC 3610, DOI 10.17487/RFC3610, September | |||
| 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3610>. | 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3610>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 17, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 35 ¶ | |||
| [RFC5535] Bagnulo, M., "Hash-Based Addresses (HBA)", RFC 5535, | [RFC5535] Bagnulo, M., "Hash-Based Addresses (HBA)", RFC 5535, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC5535, June 2009, | DOI 10.17487/RFC5535, June 2009, | |||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5535>. | <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5535>. | |||
| [RFC7217] Gont, F., "A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque | [RFC7217] Gont, F., "A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque | |||
| Interface Identifiers with IPv6 Stateless Address | Interface Identifiers with IPv6 Stateless Address | |||
| Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)", RFC 7217, | Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)", RFC 7217, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC7217, April 2014, | DOI 10.17487/RFC7217, April 2014, | |||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7217>. | <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7217>. | |||
| [RFC7668] Nieminen, J., Savolainen, T., Isomaki, M., Patil, B., | ||||
| Shelby, Z., and C. Gomez, "IPv6 over BLUETOOTH(R) Low | ||||
| Energy", RFC 7668, DOI 10.17487/RFC7668, October 2015, | ||||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7668>. | ||||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Peter B. Mariager | Peter B. Mariager | |||
| RTX A/S | RTX A/S | |||
| Stroemmen 6 | Stroemmen 6 | |||
| DK-9400 Noerresundby | DK-9400 Noerresundby | |||
| Denmark | Denmark | |||
| Email: pm@rtx.dk | Email: pm@rtx.dk | |||
| Jens Toftgaard Petersen (editor) | Jens Toftgaard Petersen (editor) | |||
| RTX A/S | RTX A/S | |||
| Stroemmen 6 | Stroemmen 6 | |||
| DK-9400 Noerresundby | DK-9400 Noerresundby | |||
| Denmark | Denmark | |||
| Email: jtp@rtx.dk | Email: jtp@rtx.dk | |||
| Zach Shelby | Zach Shelby | |||
| Sensinode | ARM | |||
| 150 Rose Orchard | 150 Rose Orchard | |||
| San Jose, CA 95134 | San Jose, CA 95134 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: zach.shelby@arm.com | Email: zach.shelby@arm.com | |||
| Marco van de Logt | Marco van de Logt | |||
| Gigaset Communications GmbH | Gigaset Communications GmbH | |||
| Frankenstrasse 2 | Frankenstrasse 2 | |||
| D-46395 Bocholt | D-46395 Bocholt | |||
| End of changes. 46 change blocks. | ||||
| 156 lines changed or deleted | 201 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/ | ||||