| < draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-05.txt | draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-06.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: November 17, 2016 Z. Shelby | Expires: April 6, 2017 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 | |||
| May 16, 2016 | October 3, 2016 | |||
| Transmission of IPv6 Packets over DECT Ultra Low Energy | Transmission of IPv6 Packets over DECT Ultra Low Energy | |||
| draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-05 | draft-ietf-6lo-dect-ule-06 | |||
| 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 November 17, 2016. | This Internet-Draft will expire on April 6, 2017. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2016 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 32 ¶ | |||
| 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1.2. Terms Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2. DECT Ultra Low Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2. DECT Ultra Low Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2.1. The DECT ULE Protocol Stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.3. Addressing Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.4. MTU Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.4. MTU Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 2.5. Additional Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 2.5. Additional Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 3. Specification of IPv6 over DECT ULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 3. Specification of IPv6 over DECT ULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 3.1. Protocol Stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.1. Protocol Stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3.2. Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 3.2. Link Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 3.3. Subnets and Internet Connectivity Scenarios . . . . . . . 13 | 3.3. Subnets and Internet Connectivity Scenarios . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6. ETSI Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 6. ETSI Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| DECT Ultra Low Energy (DECT ULE or just ULE) is an air interface | DECT (Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications) is a standard | |||
| technology building on the key fundamentals of traditional DECT / | series [EN300.175-part1-7] specified by ETSI and CAT-iq (Cordless | |||
| CAT-iq but with specific changes to significantly reduce the power | Advanced Technology - internet and quality) is a set of product | |||
| consumption at the expense of data throughput. DECT (Digital | certification and interoperability profiles [CAT-iq] defined by DECT | |||
| Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications) is a standard series | Forum. DECT Ultra Low Energy (DECT ULE or just ULE) is an air | |||
| [EN300.175-part1-7] specified by ETSI and CAT-iq (Cordless Advanced | interface technology building on the key fundamentals of traditional | |||
| Technology - internet and quality) is a set of product certication | DECT / CAT-iq but with specific changes to significantly reduce the | |||
| and interoperability profiles [CAT-iq] defined by DECT Forum. DECT | power consumption at the expense of data throughput. DECT ULE | |||
| ULE devices with requirements on power consumption as specified by | devices with requirements on power consumption as specified by ETSI | |||
| ETSI in [TS102.939-1] and [TS102.939-2], will operate on special | in [TS102.939-1] and [TS102.939-2], will operate on special power | |||
| power optimized silicon, but can connect to a DECT Gateway supporting | 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 4, line 7 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 7 ¶ | |||
| [RFC4944], [RFC6282], [RFC6775] and [RFC7668]. | [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 | |||
| 6CO: 6LoWPAN Context Option [RFC6775] | 6CO: 6LoWPAN Context Option [RFC6775] | |||
| 6LBR: DECT Fixed Part having a role as defined in [RFC6775] | 6BBR: 6loWPAN Backbone Router | |||
| 6LN: DECT Portable part having a role as defined in [RFC6775] | 6LBR: 6LoWPAN Border Router as defined in [RFC6775]. The DECT Fixed | |||
| 6LoWPAN: IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Network | Part is having this role | |||
| AES128: Advanced Encryption Standard with key size of 128 bits | 6LN: 6LoWPAN Node as defined in [RFC6775]. The DECT Portable part | |||
| API: Application Programming Interface | is having this role | |||
| ARO: Address Registration Option [RFC6775] | 6LoWPAN: IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Network | |||
| CAT-iq: Cordless Advanced Technology - internet and quality | AES128: Advanced Encryption Standard with key size of 128 bits | |||
| CID: Context Identifier [RFC6775] | API: Application Programming Interface | |||
| DAC: Destination Address Compression | ARO: Address Registration Option [RFC6775] | |||
| DAM: Destination Address Mode | CAT-iq: Cordless Advanced Technology - internet and quality | |||
| DHCPv6: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 [RFC3315] | CID: Context Identifier [RFC6775] | |||
| DLC: Data Link Control | DAC: Destination Address Compression | |||
| DSAA2: DECT Standard Authentication Algorithm #2 | DAM: Destination Address Mode | |||
| DSC: DECT Standard Cipher | DHCPv6: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 [RFC3315] | |||
| DSC2: DECT Standard Cipher #2 | DLC: Data Link Control | |||
| FDMA: Frequency Division Multiplex | DSAA2: DECT Standard Authentication Algorithm #2 | |||
| FP: DECT Fixed Part, the gateway | DSC: DECT Standard Cipher | |||
| GAP: Generic Access Profile | DSC2: DECT Standard Cipher #2 | |||
| IID: Interface Identifier | FDMA: Frequency Division Multiplex | |||
| IPEI: International Portable Equipment Identity; (DECT identity) | FP: DECT Fixed Part, the gateway | |||
| MAC-48: 48 bit global unique MAC address managed by IEEE | GAP: Generic Access Profile | |||
| MAC: Media Access Control | IID: Interface Identifier | |||
| MTU: Maximum Transmission Unit | IPEI: International Portable Equipment Identity; (DECT identity) | |||
| ND: Neighbor Discovery [RFC4861] [RFC6775] | MAC-48: 48 bit global unique MAC address managed by IEEE | |||
| PDU: Protocol Data Unit | MAC: Media Access Control | |||
| PHY: Physical Layer | MTU: Maximum Transmission Unit | |||
| PMID: Portable MAC Identity; (DECT identity) | NBMA: Non-broadcast multi-access | |||
| PP: DECT Portable Part, typically the sensor node (6LN) | ND: Neighbor Discovery [RFC4861] [RFC6775] | |||
| PVC: Permanent Virtual Circuit | PDU: Protocol Data Unit | |||
| RFPI: Radio Fixed Part Identity; (DECT identity) | PHY: Physical Layer | |||
| SAC: Source Address Compression | PMID: Portable MAC Identity; (DECT identity) | |||
| SAM: Source Address Mode | PP: DECT Portable Part, typically the sensor node (6LN) | |||
| TDD: Time Division Duplex | PVC: Permanent Virtual Circuit | |||
| TDMA: Time Division Multiplex | RFPI: Radio Fixed Part Identity; (DECT identity) | |||
| TPUI: Temporary Portable User Identity; (DECT identity) | SAC: Source Address Compression | |||
| UAK: User Authentication Key, DECT master security key | SAM: Source Address Mode | |||
| ULA: Unique Local Address [RFC4193] | 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 | |||
| The DECT ULE protocol stack consists of the PHY layer operating at | The DECT ULE protocol stack consists of the PHY layer operating at | |||
| frequencies in the 1880 - 1920 MHz frequency band depending on the | frequencies in the 1880 - 1920 MHz frequency band depending on the | |||
| region and uses a symbol rate of 1.152 Mbps. Radio bearers are | region and uses a symbol rate of 1.152 Mbps. Radio bearers are | |||
| allocated by use of FDMA/TDMA/TDD technics. | allocated by use of FDMA/TDMA/TDD techniques. | |||
| In its generic network topology, DECT is defined as a cellular | In its generic network topology, DECT is defined as a cellular | |||
| network technology. However, the most common configuration is a star | network technology. However, the most common configuration is a star | |||
| network with a single FP defining the network with a number of PP | network with a single FP defining the network with a number of PP | |||
| attached. The MAC layer supports both traditional DECT as this is | attached. The MAC layer supports both traditional DECT circuit mode | |||
| used for services like discovery, pairing, security features etc. | operation as this is used for services like discovery, pairing, | |||
| All these features have been reused from DECT. | security features etc, and it supports new ULE packet mode operation. | |||
| The circuit mode features have been reused from DECT. | ||||
| 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, this document is not considering usage of the | broadcast. However, this document is not considering usage of the | |||
| DECT ULE MAC layer broadcast service. | DECT ULE MAC layer broadcast service for IPv6 over DECT ULE. | |||
| 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 6, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 45 ¶ | |||
| Media Access Control Layer, (DLC) Data Link Control Layer, (NWK) | Media Access Control Layer, (DLC) Data Link Control Layer, (NWK) | |||
| Network Layer with subcomponents: (LLME) Lower Layer Management | Network Layer with subcomponents: (LLME) Lower Layer Management | |||
| Entity, (MM) Mobility Management and (CC) Call Control. Above there | Entity, (MM) Mobility Management and (CC) Call Control. Above there | |||
| are the typically (API) Application Programmers Interface and | are the typically (API) Application Programmers Interface and | |||
| application profile specific layers. | 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 only addresses this primary scenario and all other | |||
| scenarios are out of scope. | ||||
| 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 (see | |||
| Section 3.3). | ||||
| [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 | A significant difference between IEEE 802.15.4 and DECT ULE is that | |||
| the former supports both star and mesh topology (and requires a | the former supports both star and mesh topology (and requires a | |||
| routing protocol), whereas DECT ULE in it's primary configuration | routing protocol), whereas DECT ULE in it's primary configuration | |||
| does not support the formation of multihop networks at the link | does not support the formation of multihop networks at the link | |||
| layer. In consequence, the mesh header defined in [RFC4944] for mesh | layer. In consequence, the mesh header defined in [RFC4944] for mesh | |||
| under routing are not used in DECT ULE networks. | under routing are not used in DECT ULE networks. | |||
| DECT ULE repeaters are not considered in this document. | DECT ULE repeaters are considered to operate in the DECT protocol | |||
| domain and are outside the scope of 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 globally unique within DECT addressing | |||
| can be used to constitute the MAC address. However, it cannot be | space and can be used to constitute the MAC address used to derive | |||
| used to derive a globally unique IID. | the IID for link-local address. However, it cannot be used to derive | |||
| a globally unique IID. | ||||
| When bound to a FP, a PP is assigned a 20 bit TPUI which is unique | During a DECT location registration procedure, the FP assigns a 20 | |||
| within the FP. This TPUI is used for addressing (layer 2) in | bit TPUI to a PP. The FP creates a unique mapping between the | |||
| messages between FP and PP. | assigned TPUI and the IPEI of each PP. This TPUI is used for | |||
| addressing (layer 2) in messages between FP and PP. Although the | ||||
| TPUI is temporary by definition, the same value is usually repeatedly | ||||
| assigned to any given PP, hence it seems not suitable for | ||||
| construction of IID, see [I-D.ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations]. | ||||
| 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 within DECT addressing | |||
| used to constitute the MAC address used to derive the IID for link- | space and can be used to constitute the MAC address used to derive | |||
| local address. However, it cannot be used to derive a globally | the IID for link-local address. However, it cannot be used to derive | |||
| unique IID. | a globally unique IID. | |||
| Optionally each DECT PP and DECT FP can be assigned a unique (IEEE) | Optionally each DECT PP and DECT FP can be assigned a unique (IEEE) | |||
| MAC-48 address additionally to the DECT identities to be used by the | MAC-48 address additionally to the DECT identities to be used by the | |||
| 6LoWPAN. During the address registration of non-link-local addresses | 6LoWPAN. During the address registration of non-link-local addresses | |||
| as specified by this document, the FP and PP can use such MAC-48 to | as specified by this document, the FP and PP can use such MAC-48 to | |||
| construct the IID. | construct the IID. However, as these addresses are considered as | |||
| being permanent, such scheme is not recommended as per [I-D.ietf-6lo- | ||||
| privacy-considerations]. | ||||
| 2.4. MTU Considerations | 2.4. MTU Considerations | |||
| Ideally the DECT ULE FP and PP may generate data that fits into a | Ideally the DECT ULE FP and PP may generate data that fits into a | |||
| single MAC Layer packets (38 octets) for periodically transferred | single MAC Layer packets (38 octets) for periodically transferred | |||
| information, depending on application. However, IP packets may be | information, depending on application. However, IP packets may be | |||
| much larger. The DECT ULE DLC procedures supports segmentation and | much larger. The DECT ULE DLC procedures natively support | |||
| reassembly of any MTU size below 65536 octets, but the default MTU | segmentation and reassembly and provide any MTU size below 65536 | |||
| size defined in DECT ULE [TS102.939-1] is 500 octets. In order to | octets. The default MTU size defined in DECT ULE [TS102.939-1] is | |||
| support complete IP packets, the DLC layer of DECT ULE SHALL per this | 500 octets. In order to support complete IPv6 packets, the DLC layer | |||
| specification be configured with a MTU size that fits the | of DECT ULE shall per this specification be configured with a MTU | |||
| requirements from IPv6 data packets, hence [RFC4944] fragmentation/ | size of 1280 octets, hence [RFC4944] fragmentation/reassembly is not | |||
| reassembly is not required. | required. | |||
| It is expected that the LOWPAN_IPHC packet will fulfil all the | It is expected that the LOWPAN_IPHC packet will fulfil 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 | |||
| consuming power to transmit / receive. | consuming power to transmit / receive. The increased MTU size does | |||
| not change the MAC layer packet and PDU size. | ||||
| 2.5. Additional Considerations | 2.5. Additional Considerations | |||
| The DECT ULE standard allows PP to be registered (bind) to multiple | The DECT ULE standard allows PP to be DECT-registered (bind) to | |||
| FP and roaming between these FP. This draft does not consider the | multiple FP and roaming between them. These FP and their 6LBR | |||
| scenarios of PP roaming between multiple FP. The use of repeater | functionalities can either operate individual or connected through a | |||
| functionality is also not considered in this draft. | Backbone Router as per [I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router]. | |||
| 3. Specification of IPv6 over DECT ULE | 3. Specification of IPv6 over DECT ULE | |||
| Before any IP-layer communications can take place over DECT ULE, DECT | Before any IP-layer communications can take place over DECT ULE, DECT | |||
| ULE enabled nodes such as 6LNs and 6LBRs have to find each other and | ULE enabled nodes such as 6LNs and 6LBRs have to find each other and | |||
| establish a suitable link-layer connection. The obtain-access-rights | establish a suitable link-layer connection. The obtain-access-rights | |||
| registration and location registration procedures are documented by | registration and location registration procedures are documented by | |||
| ETSI in the specifications [EN300.175-part1-7], [TS102.939-1] and | ETSI in the specifications [EN300.175-part1-7], [TS102.939-1] and | |||
| [TS102.939-2]. | [TS102.939-2]. | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 9 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 24 ¶ | |||
| layer. Figure 3 illustrates IPv6 over DECT ULE stack. | layer. Figure 3 illustrates IPv6 over DECT ULE stack. | |||
| As consequence of DECT ULE in it's primary configuration does not | As consequence of DECT ULE in it's primary configuration does not | |||
| support the formation of multihop networks at the link layer, the | support the formation of multihop networks at the link layer, the | |||
| mesh header defined in [RFC4944] for mesh under routing MUST NOT be | mesh header defined in [RFC4944] for mesh under routing MUST NOT be | |||
| used. In addition, a DECT ULE PP node MUST NOT play the role of a | used. In addition, a DECT ULE PP node MUST NOT play the role of a | |||
| 6LoWPAN Router (6LR). | 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 data transmission over DECT ULE, a Permanent | |||
| Permanent Virtual Circuit (PVC) has to be opened between FP and PP. | Virtual Circuit (PVC) has to be configured and opened between FP and | |||
| This MUST be done by setting up a service call from PP to FP. The PP | PP. This is done by setting up a DECT service call from PP to FP. | |||
| SHALL specify the <<IWU-ATTRIBUTES>> in a service-change (other) | In DECT protocol domain the PP SHALL specify the <<IWU-ATTRIBUTES>> | |||
| message before sending a service-change (resume) message as defined | in a service-change (other) message before sending a service-change | |||
| in [TS102.939-1]. The <<IWU-ATTRIBTES>> SHALL define the ULE | (resume) message as defined in [TS102.939-1]. The <<IWU-ATTRIBTES>> | |||
| Application Protocol Identifier to 0x06 and the MTU size to 1280 | SHALL define the ULE Application Protocol Identifier to 0x06 and the | |||
| octets or larger. The FP MUST send a service-change-accept (resume) | MTU size to 1280 octets or larger. The FP sends a service-change- | |||
| containing a valid paging descriptor. The PP MUST be pageable. | accept (resume) that MUST contain a valid paging descriptor. The PP | |||
| MUST be pageable. Following this, transmission of IPv6 packets can | ||||
| start. | ||||
| +-------------------+ | +-------------------+ | |||
| | UDP/TCP/other | | | UDP/TCP/other | | |||
| +-------------------+ | +-------------------+ | |||
| | IPv6 | | | IPv6 | | |||
| +-------------------+ | +-------------------+ | |||
| |6LoWPAN adapted to | | |6LoWPAN adapted to | | |||
| | DECT ULE | | | DECT ULE | | |||
| +-------------------+ | +-------------------+ | |||
| | DECT ULE DLC | | | DECT ULE DLC | | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 27 ¶ | |||
| | 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 already fragmentation and | layer 2. The DECT ULE implements already fragmentation and | |||
| reassembly functionality, hence [RFC4944] fragmentation and | reassembly functionality, hence [RFC4944] fragmentation and | |||
| reassembly function MUST NOT be used. The DECT ULE DLC link (PVC) | reassembly function MUST NOT be used. | |||
| MUST be configured with a minimum MTU size of at least 1280 octets in | ||||
| order to meet the size requirements of IPv6. | 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 begin. The 6LBR ensures address collisions do not occur. | ||||
| 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 the DECT ULE star topology (see Section 2.2), PP each have a | |||
| to be an individual link and thus the PPs cannot directly hear one | separate link to the FP, 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. As discussed in [RFC4903], | |||
| However, the FP acts as a 6LBR for communication between the PPs. | conventional usage of IPv6 anticipates IPv6 subnets spanning a single | |||
| After the FP and PPs have connected at the DECT ULE level, the link | link at the link layer. In order avoid the complexity of | |||
| can be considered up and IPv6 address configuration and transmission | implementing separate subnet for each DECT ULE link, a Multi-Link | |||
| can begin. The FP ensures address collisions do not occur. | Subnet model has been chosen, specifically Non-broadcast multi-access | |||
| (NBMA) at layer 2. Because of this, link-local multicast | ||||
| communications can happen only within a single DECT ULE connection; | ||||
| thus, 6LN-to-6LN communications using link-local addresses are not | ||||
| possible. 6LNs connected to the same 6LBR have to communicate with | ||||
| each other by using the shared prefix used on the subnet. The 6LBR | ||||
| forwards packets sent by one 6LN to another. | ||||
| 3.2.1. Stateless Address Autoconfiguration | 3.2.1. Stateless Address Autoconfiguration | |||
| At network interface initialization, both 6LN and 6LBR SHALL generate | At network interface initialization, both 6LN and 6LBR SHALL generate | |||
| and assign to the DECT ULE network interface IPv6 link-local | and assign to the DECT ULE network interface IPv6 link-local | |||
| addresses [RFC4862] based on the DECT device addresses (see | addresses [RFC4862] based on the DECT device addresses (see | |||
| Section 2.3) that were used for establishing the underlying DECT ULE | Section 2.3) that were used for establishing the underlying DECT ULE | |||
| connection. | connection. | |||
| The DECT device addresses IPEI and RFPI MUST be used to derive the | The DECT device addresses IPEI and RFPI MUST be used to derive the | |||
| IPv6 link-local 64 bit Interface Identifiers (IID) for 6LN and 6LBR, | IPv6 link-local 64 bit Interface Identifiers (IID) for 6LN and 6LBR, | |||
| respectively. | respectively. | |||
| The rule for deriving IID from DECT device addresses is as follows: | The rule for deriving IID from DECT device addresses is as follows: | |||
| The DECT device addresses that are consisting of 40 bits each, MUST | The DECT device addresses that are consisting of 40 bits each, MUST | |||
| be expanded with leading zero bits to form 48 bit intermediate | be expanded with leading zero bits to form 48 bit intermediate | |||
| addresses. Most significant bit in this newly formed 48-bit | addresses. Most significant bit in this newly formed 48-bit | |||
| intermediate address is set to one for addresses derived from the | intermediate address is set to one for addresses derived from the | |||
| RFPI and set to zero for addresses derived from the IPEI. From these | RFPI and set to zero for addresses derived from the IPEI. From these | |||
| intermediate 48 bit addresses are derived 64 bit IIDs according to | intermediate 48 bit addresses are derived 64 bit IIDs similar to the | |||
| the guidance of [RFC4291]. In the derived IIDs the U/L bit (7th bit) | guidance of [RFC4291]. However, because DECT and IEEE address spaces | |||
| will be zero, indicating that derived IID's are not globally unique, | are different, this intermediate address cannot be considered as | |||
| see [RFC7136]. For example from RFPI=11.22.33.44.55 the derived IID | unique within IEEE address space. In the derived IIDs the U/L bit | |||
| is 80:11:22:ff:fe:33:44:55 and from IPEI=01.23.45.67.89 the derived | (7th bit) will be zero, indicating that derived IID's are not | |||
| IID is 00:01:23:ff:fe:45:67:89. | globally unique, see [RFC7136]. For example from RFPI=11.22.33.44.55 | |||
| the derived IID is 80:11:22:ff:fe:33:44:55 and from | ||||
| IPEI=01.23.45.67.89 the derived IID is 00:01:23:ff:fe:45:67:89. | ||||
| As defined in [RFC4291], the IPv6 link-local address is formed by | 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. | appending the IID, to the prefix FE80::/64, as shown in Figure 4. | |||
| From privacy perspective such constructed link-local address should | ||||
| never be used by application layers that could leak it outside the | ||||
| subnet domain. | ||||
| 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, 6LNs SHOULD NOT be configured to use | For non-link-local addresses, 6LNs SHOULD NOT be configured to use | |||
| IIDs derived from a MAC-48 device address or DECT device addresses. | IIDs derived from a MAC-48 device address or DECT device addresses. | |||
| Alternative schemes such as Cryptographically Generated Addresses | Alternative schemes such as Cryptographically Generated Addresses | |||
| (CGAs) [RFC3972], privacy extensions [RFC4941], Hash-Based Addresses | (CGAs) [RFC3972], privacy extensions [RFC4941], Hash-Based Addresses | |||
| (HBAs) [RFC5535], DHCPv6 [RFC3315], or static, semantically opaque | (HBAs) [RFC5535], DHCPv6 [RFC3315], or static, semantically opaque | |||
| addresses [RFC7217] SHOULD be used by default. In situations where | addresses [RFC7217] SHOULD be used by default. See also [I-D.ietf- | |||
| the devices address embedded in the IID are required to support | 6lo-privacy-considerations] for guidance of needed entropy in IIDs. | |||
| deployment constraints, 6LN MAY form a 64-bit IID by utilizing the | In situations where the devices address embedded in the IID are | |||
| MAC-48 device address or DECT device addresses. The non-link-local | required to support deployment constraints, 6LN MAY form a 64-bit IID | |||
| addresses 6LN generates MUST be registered with 6LBR as described in | by utilizing the MAC-48 device address or DECT device addresses. The | |||
| Section 3.2.2. | non-link-local addresses that a 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 address 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 | |||
| [RFC6775] are applicable to DECT ULE 6LNs: | [RFC6775] are applicable to DECT ULE 6LNs: | |||
| 1. For sending Router Solicitations and processing Router | 1. For sending Router Solicitations and processing Router | |||
| Advertisements the DECT ULE 6LNs MUST, respectively, follow Sections | Advertisements the DECT ULE 6LNs MUST, respectively, follow Sections | |||
| 5.3 and 5.4 of the [RFC6775]. | 5.3 and 5.4 of the [RFC6775]. | |||
| 2. A DECT ULE 6LN MUST NOT register its link-local address. A DECT | 2. A DECT ULE 6LN MUST NOT register its link-local address. Because | |||
| ULE 6LN MUST register its non-link-local addresses with the 6LBR by | the IIDs used in link-local addresses are derived from DECT | |||
| sending a Neighbor Solicitation (NS) message with the Address | addresses, there will always exist a unique mapping between link- | |||
| Registration Option (ARO) and process the Neighbor Advertisement (NA) | local and layer-2 addresses. | |||
| accordingly. The NS with the ARO option MUST be sent irrespective of | ||||
| the method used to generate the IID. The 6LN MUST register only one | 3. A DECT ULE 6LN MUST register its non-link-local addresses with | |||
| IPv6 address per available IPv6 prefix. | the 6LBR by sending a Neighbor Solicitation (NS) message with the | |||
| Address Registration Option (ARO) and process the Neighbor | ||||
| Advertisement (NA) accordingly. The NS with the ARO option MUST be | ||||
| sent irrespective of the method used to generate the IID. | ||||
| 3.2.3. Unicast and Multicast Address Mapping | 3.2.3. Unicast and Multicast Address Mapping | |||
| The DECT MAC layer broadcast service is considered inadequate for IP | The DECT MAC layer broadcast service is considered inadequate for IP | |||
| multicast. | multicast. | |||
| Hence traffic is always unicast between two DECT ULE nodes. Even in | Hence traffic is always unicast between two DECT ULE nodes. Even in | |||
| the case where a 6LBR is attached to multiple 6LNs, the 6LBR cannot | the case where a 6LBR is attached to multiple 6LNs, the 6LBR cannot | |||
| do a multicast to all the connected 6LNs. If the 6LBR needs to send | do a multicast to all the connected 6LNs. If the 6LBR needs to send | |||
| a multicast packet to all its 6LNs, it has to replicate the packet | a multicast packet to all its 6LNs, it has to replicate the packet | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 45 ¶ | |||
| ARO and 6CO can be exploited in order to provide a mechanism for | ARO and 6CO can be exploited in order to provide a mechanism for | |||
| address compression. The following text describes the principles of | address compression. The following text describes the principles of | |||
| IPv6 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 used | IPv6 source and destination addresses MUST be elided, since the used | |||
| IIDs map uniquely into the DECT link end point addresses. A 6LN or | IIDs map uniquely into the DECT link end point addresses. A 6LN or | |||
| 6LBR that receives a PDU containing an IPv6 packet can infer the | 6LBR that receives a PDU containing an IPv6 packet can infer the | |||
| corresponding IPv6 source address. For the type of communication | corresponding IPv6 source address. For the unicast type of | |||
| considered in this paragraph, the following settings MUST be used in | communication considered in this paragraph, the following settings | |||
| the IPv6 compressed header: CID=0, SAC=0, SAM=11, DAC=0, DAM=11. | 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 | |||
| 6LNs global IPv6 address, the 6LN MUST indicate this context in the | 6LNs global IPv6 address, the 6LN MUST indicate this context in the | |||
| corresponding source fields of the compressed IPv6 header as per | corresponding source fields of the compressed IPv6 header as per | |||
| Section 3.1 of [RFC6282], and MUST elide the IPv6 source address. | Section 3.1 of [RFC6282], and MUST fully elide the latest registered | |||
| For this, the 6LN MUST use the following settings in the IPv6 | IPv6 source address. For this, the 6LN MUST use the following | |||
| compressed header: CID=1, SAC=1, SAM=11. In this case, the 6LBR can | settings in the IPv6 compressed header: CID=1, SAC=1, SAM=11. In | |||
| infer the elided IPv6 source address since 1) the 6LBR has previously | this case, the 6LBR can infer the elided IPv6 source address since 1) | |||
| assigned the prefix to the 6LNs; and 2) the 6LBR maintains a Neighbor | the 6LBR has previously assigned the prefix to the 6LNs; and 2) the | |||
| Cache that relates the Device Address and the IID of the | 6LBR maintains a Neighbor Cache that relates the Device Address and | |||
| corresponding PP. If a context is defined for the IPv6 destination | the IID of the corresponding PP. If a context is defined for the | |||
| address, the 6LN MUST also indicate this context in the corresponding | IPv6 destination address, the 6LN MUST also indicate this context in | |||
| destination fields of the compressed IPv6 header, and MUST elide the | the corresponding destination fields of the compressed IPv6 header, | |||
| prefix of the destination IPv6 address. For this, the 6LN MUST set | and MUST elide the prefix of the destination IPv6 address. For this, | |||
| the DAM field of the compressed IPv6 header as CID=1, DAC=1 and | the 6LN MUST set the DAM field of the compressed IPv6 header as | |||
| DAM=01 or DAM=11. Note that when a context is defined for the IPv6 | CID=1, DAC=1 and DAM=01 or DAM=11. Note that when a context is | |||
| destination address, the 6LBR can infer the elided destination prefix | defined for the IPv6 destination address, the 6LBR can infer the | |||
| by using the context. | elided destination prefix by using the context. | |||
| When a 6LBR receives a IPv6 packet having a global Unicast IPv6 | When a 6LBR receives a IPv6 packet having a global Unicast IPv6 | |||
| address, and the destination of the packet is a 6LN, if a context is | address, and the destination of the packet is a 6LN, if a context is | |||
| defined for the prefix of the 6LN's global IPv6 address, the 6LBR | defined for the prefix of the 6LN's global IPv6 address, the 6LBR | |||
| MUST indicate this context in the corresponding destination fields of | MUST indicate this context in the corresponding destination fields of | |||
| the compressed IPv6 header, and MUST elide the IPv6 destination | the compressed IPv6 header, and MUST fully elide the IPv6 destination | |||
| address of the packet before forwarding it to the 6LN. For this, the | address of the packet if the destination address is the latest | |||
| 6LBR MUST set the DAM field of the IPv6 compressed header as DAM=11. | registered by the 6LN for the indicated context. For this, the 6LBR | |||
| CID and DAC MUST be set to CID=1 and DAC=1. If a context is defined | MUST set the DAM field of the IPv6 compressed header as DAM=11. CID | |||
| for the prefix of the IPv6 source address, the 6LBR MUST indicate | and DAC MUST be set to CID=1 and DAC=1. If a context is defined for | |||
| this context in the source fields of the compressed IPv6 header, and | the prefix of the IPv6 source address, the 6LBR MUST indicate this | |||
| MUST elide that prefix as well. For this, the 6LBR MUST set the SAM | context in the source fields of the compressed IPv6 header, and MUST | |||
| field of the IPv6 compressed header as CID=1, SAC=1 and SAM=01 or | elide that prefix as well. For this, the 6LBR MUST set the SAM field | |||
| SAM=11. | of the IPv6 compressed header as CID=1, SAC=1 and SAM=01 or 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 the DECT ULE star topology (see Section 2.2), PP each have a | |||
| Internet as shown in the Figure 5. In this scenario, the DECT ULE | separate link to the FP and the FP acts as an IPv6 router rather than | |||
| network is deployed as one subnet, using one /64 IPv6 prefix. The | a link-layer switch. A Multi-Link Subnet model [RFC4903] has been | |||
| 6LBR is acting as router and forwarding packets between 6LNs and to | chosen, specifically Non-broadcast multi-access (NBMA) at layer 2 as | |||
| and from Internet. | further illustrated in Figure 5. The 6LBR forwards packets sent by | |||
| one 6LN to another. In a typical scenario, the DECT ULE network is | ||||
| Other scenarios can be imagined where a PP is acting as 6LBR and | connected to the Internet as shown in the Figure 5. In this | |||
| providing Internet connectivity for the FP. How the FP could then | scenario, the DECT ULE network is deployed as one subnet, using one | |||
| further provide Internet connectivity to other PP, possibly connected | /64 IPv6 prefix. The 6LBR is acting as router and forwarding packets | |||
| to the FP, is out of the scope of this document. | between 6LNs and to and from Internet. | |||
| 6LN | 6LN | |||
| \ ____________ | \ ____________ | |||
| \ / \ | \ / \ | |||
| 6LN ---- 6LBR --- | Internet | | 6LN ---- 6LBR ------ | Internet | | |||
| / \____________/ | / \____________/ | |||
| / | / | |||
| 6LN | 6LN | |||
| <-- DECT ULE --> | <-- One subnet --> | |||
| <-- DECT ULE --> | ||||
| Figure 5: DECT ULE network connected to the Internet | Figure 5: DECT ULE network connected to the Internet | |||
| In some scenarios, the DECT ULE network may transiently or | In some scenarios, the DECT ULE network may transiently or | |||
| permanently be an isolated network as shown in the Figure 6. In this | permanently be an isolated network as shown in the Figure 6. In this | |||
| case the whole DECT ULE network consists of a single subnet with | case the whole DECT ULE network consists of a single subnet with | |||
| multiple links, where 6LBR is routing packets between 6LNs. | multiple links, where 6LBR is routing packets between 6LNs. | |||
| 6LN 6LN | 6LN 6LN | |||
| \ / | \ / | |||
| \ / | \ / | |||
| 6LN --- 6LBR --- 6LN | 6LN --- 6LBR --- 6LN | |||
| / \ | / \ | |||
| / \ | / \ | |||
| 6LN 6LN | 6LN 6LN | |||
| <---- One subnet ----> | ||||
| <------ DECT ULE -----> | <------ DECT ULE -----> | |||
| Figure 6: Isolated DECT ULE network | Figure 6: Isolated DECT ULE network | |||
| In the isolated network scenario, communications between 6LN and 6LBR | In the isolated network scenario, communications between 6LN and 6LBR | |||
| can use IPv6 link-local methodology, but for communications between | can use IPv6 link-local methodology, but for communications between | |||
| 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. | |||
| In other more advanced systems scenarios with multiple FP and 6LBR, | ||||
| each DECT ULE FP constitutes a wireless cell. The network can be | ||||
| configured as a Multi-Link Subnet, in which the can 6LN operate | ||||
| within the same /64 subnet prefix in multiple cells as shown in the | ||||
| Figure 7. The FPs operation role in such scenario are rather like | ||||
| Backbone Routers (6BBR) than 6LBR, as per [I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone- | ||||
| router]. | ||||
| ____________ | ||||
| / \ | ||||
| | Internet | | ||||
| \____________/ | ||||
| | | ||||
| | | ||||
| | | ||||
| | | ||||
| 6BBR/ | 6BBR/ | ||||
| 6LN ---- 6LBR -------+------- 6LBR ---- 6LN | ||||
| / \ / \ | ||||
| / \ / \ | ||||
| 6LN 6LN 6LN 6LN | ||||
| <------------------One subnet ------------------> | ||||
| <-- DECT ULE Cell --> <-- DECT ULE Cell --> | ||||
| Figure 7: Multiple DECT ULE cells in a single Multi-Link subnet | ||||
| 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 DSC/DSC2 specification developed by ETSI TC DECT and the | DSAA2 and DSC/DSC2 specification developed by ETSI TC DECT and the | |||
| ETSI SAGE Security expert group. | ETSI SAGE Security expert group. | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 15 ¶ | |||
| 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. | |||
| From privacy point of view, the IPv6 link-local address configuration | From privacy point of view, the IPv6 link-local address configuration | |||
| described in Section 3.2.1 only reveals information about the 6LN to | described in Section 3.2.1 only reveals information about the 6LN to | |||
| the 6LBR that the 6LBR already knows from the link-layer connection. | the 6LBR that the 6LBR already knows from the link-layer connection. | |||
| For non-link-local IPv6 addresses, by default a 6LN SHOULD use a | 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- | randomly generated IID, for example, as discussed in [I-D.ietf-6man- | |||
| default- iids], or use alternative schemes such as Cryptographically | default-iids], or use alternative schemes such as Cryptographically | |||
| Generated Addresses (CGA) [RFC3972], privacy extensions [RFC4941], | Generated Addresses (CGA) [RFC3972], privacy extensions [RFC4941], | |||
| Hash-Based Addresses (HBA, [RFC5535]), or static, semantically opaque | Hash-Based Addresses (HBA, [RFC5535]), or static, semantically opaque | |||
| addresses [RFC7217]. | 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 39 ¶ | |||
| 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, Samita Chakrabarti and Kerry Lynn have provided valuable | Ralph Droms, Samita Chakrabarti, Kerry Lynn, Suresh Krishnan and | |||
| feedback for this draft. | Pascal Thubert 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/ | <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/ | |||
| etsi_en/300100_300199/30017501/02.06.01_60/ | etsi_en/300100_300199/30017501/02.06.01_60/ | |||
| skipping to change at page 18, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 19, line 32 ¶ | |||
| etsi_ts/102900_102999/10293902/01.01.01_60/ | etsi_ts/102900_102999/10293902/01.01.01_60/ | |||
| ts_10293902v010101p.pdf>. | ts_10293902v010101p.pdf>. | |||
| 8.2. Informative References | 8.2. Informative References | |||
| [CAT-iq] DECT Forum, "Cordless Advanced Technology - internet and | [CAT-iq] DECT Forum, "Cordless Advanced Technology - internet and | |||
| quality", January 2016, | quality", January 2016, | |||
| <http://www.dect.org/userfiles/Public/ | <http://www.dect.org/userfiles/Public/ | |||
| DF_CAT-iq%20Certification%20Overview.pdf>. | DF_CAT-iq%20Certification%20Overview.pdf>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router] | ||||
| Thubert, P., "IPv6 Backbone Router", draft-ietf-6lo- | ||||
| backbone-router-02 (work in progress), September 2016. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-6lo-privacy-considerations] | ||||
| Thaler, D., "Privacy Considerations for IPv6 over Networks | ||||
| of Resource-Constrained Nodes", draft-ietf-6lo-privacy- | ||||
| considerations-03 (work in progress), September 2016. | ||||
| [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-16 (work in progress), | ||||
| September 2016. | ||||
| [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>. | |||
| [RFC3972] Aura, T., "Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)", | [RFC3972] Aura, T., "Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)", | |||
| RFC 3972, DOI 10.17487/RFC3972, March 2005, | RFC 3972, DOI 10.17487/RFC3972, March 2005, | |||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3972>. | <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3972>. | |||
| [RFC4903] Thaler, D., "Multi-Link Subnet Issues", RFC 4903, | ||||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC4903, June 2007, | ||||
| <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4903>. | ||||
| [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>. | |||
| End of changes. 42 change blocks. | ||||
| 181 lines changed or deleted | 263 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/ | ||||