| < draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-03.txt | draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-04.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6Lo Working Group Y-G. Hong | 6Lo Working Group Y-G. Hong | |||
| Internet-Draft ETRI | Internet-Draft ETRI | |||
| Intended status: Informational C. Gomez | Intended status: Informational C. Gomez | |||
| Expires: May 3, 2018 UPC/i2cat | Expires: September 6, 2018 UPC | |||
| Y-H. Choi | Y-H. Choi | |||
| ETRI | ETRI | |||
| D-Y. Ko | D-Y. Ko | |||
| SKtelecom | SKtelecom | |||
| AR. Sangi | AR. Sangi | |||
| Huaiyin Institute of Technology | Huaiyin Institute of Technology | |||
| T. Aanstoot | T. Aanstoot | |||
| Modio AB | Modio AB | |||
| S. Chakrabarti | S. Chakrabarti | |||
| October 30, 2017 | March 5, 2018 | |||
| IPv6 over Constrained Node Networks (6lo) Applicability & Use cases | IPv6 over Constrained Node Networks (6lo) Applicability & Use cases | |||
| draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-03 | draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-04 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes the applicability of IPv6 over constrained | This document describes the applicability of IPv6 over constrained | |||
| node networks (6lo) and provides practical deployment examples. In | node networks (6lo) and provides practical deployment examples. In | |||
| addition to IEEE 802.15.4, various link layer technologies such as | addition to IEEE 802.15.4, various link layer technologies such as | |||
| ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), BLE, DECT-ULE, MS/TP, NFC, PLC (IEEE 1901.2), | ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), BLE, DECT-ULE, MS/TP, NFC, PLC (IEEE 1901.2), | |||
| and IEEE 802.15.4e (6tisch) are used as examples. The document | and IEEE 802.15.4e (6tisch) are used as examples. The document | |||
| targets an audience who like to understand and evaluate running end- | targets an audience who like to understand and evaluate running end- | |||
| to-end IPv6 over the constrained link layer networks connecting | to-end IPv6 over the constrained node networks connecting devices to | |||
| devices to each other or to each cloud. | each other or to other devices on the Internet (e.g. cloud | |||
| infrastructure). | ||||
| Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://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 May 3, 2018. | This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2018. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2018 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 | |||
| (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 30 ¶ | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 2. Conventions and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2. Conventions and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 3. 6lo Link layer technologies and possible candidates . . . . . 4 | 3. 6lo Link layer technologies and possible candidates . . . . . 4 | |||
| 3.1. ITU-T G.9959 (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 3.1. ITU-T G.9959 (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 3.2. Bluetooth LE (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 3.2. Bluetooth LE (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 3.3. DECT-ULE (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 3.3. DECT-ULE (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 3.4. MS/TP (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 3.4. MS/TP (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 3.5. NFC (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3.5. NFC (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 3.6. PLC (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 3.6. PLC (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 3.7. IEEE 802.15.4e (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3.7. IEEE 802.15.4e (specified) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 3.8. LTE MTC (example of a potential candidate) . . . . . . . 8 | 3.8. LTE MTC (example of a potential candidate) . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 3.9. Comparison between 6lo Link layer technologies . . . . . 8 | 3.9. Comparison between 6lo Link layer technologies . . . . . 9 | |||
| 4. 6lo Deployment Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 4. 6lo Deployment Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 4.1. jupitermesh in Smart Grid using 6lo in network layer . . 9 | 4.1. jupitermesh in Smart Grid using 6lo in network layer . . 10 | |||
| 4.2. Wi-SUN usage of 6lo stacks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 4.2. Wi-SUN usage of 6lo stacks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 5. Design Space and Guidelines for 6lo Deployment . . . . . . . 12 | 4.3. G3-PLC usage of 6lo in network layer . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 5.1. Design Space Dimensions for 6lo Deployment . . . . . . . 12 | 4.4. Netricity usage of 6lo in network layer . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 5.2. Guidelines for adopting IPv6 stack (6lo/6LoWPAN) . . . . 14 | 5. Design Space and Guidelines for 6lo Deployment . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 6. 6lo Use Case Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 5.1. Design Space Dimensions for 6lo Deployment . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 5.2. Guidelines for adopting IPv6 stack (6lo/6LoWPAN) . . . . 17 | |||
| 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 6. 6lo Use Case Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| Appendix A. Other 6lo Use Case Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| A.1. Use case of ITU-T G.9959: Smart Home . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| A.2. Use case of DECT-ULE: Smart Home . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | Appendix A. Other 6lo Use Case Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| A.3. Use case of MS/TP: Management of District Heating . . . . 22 | A.1. Use case of ITU-T G.9959: Smart Home . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| A.4. Use case of NFC: Alternative Secure Transfer . . . . . . 23 | A.2. Use case of DECT-ULE: Smart Home . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
| A.5. Use case of PLC: Smart Grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | A.3. Use case of MS/TP: Building Automation Networks . . . . . 26 | |||
| A.6. Use case of IEEE 802.15.4e: Industrial Automation . . . . 25 | A.4. Use case of NFC: Alternative Secure Transfer . . . . . . 26 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | A.5. Use case of PLC: Smart Grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| A.6. Use case of IEEE 802.15.4e: Industrial Automation . . . . 28 | ||||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | ||||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| Running IPv6 on constrained node networks has different features from | Running IPv6 on constrained node networks has different features from | |||
| general node networks due to the characteristics of constrained node | general node networks due to the characteristics of constrained node | |||
| networks such as small packet size, short link-layer address, low | networks such as small packet size, short link-layer address, low | |||
| bandwidth, network topology, low power, low cost, and large number of | bandwidth, network topology, low power, low cost, and large number of | |||
| devices [RFC4919][RFC7228]. For example, some IEEE 802.15.4 link | devices [RFC4919][RFC7228]. For example, some IEEE 802.15.4 link | |||
| layers have a frame size of 127 octets and IPv6 requires the layer | layers have a frame size of 127 octets and IPv6 requires the layer | |||
| below to support an MTU of 1280 bytes, therefore an appropriate | below to support an MTU of 1280 bytes, therefore an appropriate | |||
| fragmentation and reassembly adaptation layer must be provided at the | fragmentation and reassembly adaptation layer must be provided at the | |||
| layer below IPv6. Also, the limited size of IEEE 802.15.4 frame and | layer below IPv6. Also, the limited size of IEEE 802.15.4 frame and | |||
| low energy consumption requirements make the need for header | low energy consumption requirements make the need for header | |||
| compression. The IETF 6LoPWAN (IPv6 over Low powerWPAN) working | compression. The IETF 6LoPWAN (IPv6 over Low powerWPAN) working | |||
| group published an adaptation layer for sending IPv6 packets over | group published an adaptation layer for sending IPv6 packets over | |||
| IEEE 802.15.4 [RFC4944], a compression format for IPv6 datagrams over | IEEE 802.15.4 [RFC4944], which includes a compression format for IPv6 | |||
| IEEE 802.15.4-based networks [RFC6282], and Neighbor Discovery | datagrams over IEEE 802.15.4-based networks [RFC6282], and Neighbor | |||
| Optimization for 6LoPWAN [RFC6775]. | Discovery Optimization for 6LoPWAN [RFC6775]. | |||
| As IoT (Internet of Things) services become more popular, IPv6 over | As IoT (Internet of Things) services become more popular, IPv6 over | |||
| various link layer technologies such as Bluetooth Low Energy | various link layer technologies such as Bluetooth Low Energy | |||
| (Bluetooth LE), ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), Digital Enhanced Cordless | (Bluetooth LE), ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), Digital Enhanced Cordless | |||
| Telecommunications - Ultra Low Energy (DECT-ULE), Master-Slave/Token | Telecommunications - Ultra Low Energy (DECT-ULE), Master-Slave/Token | |||
| Passing (MS/TP), Near Field Communication (NFC), Power Line | Passing (MS/TP), Near Field Communication (NFC), Power Line | |||
| Communication (PLC), and IEEE 802.15.4e (TSCH), have been defined at | Communication (PLC), and IEEE 802.15.4e (TSCH), have been defined at | |||
| [IETF_6lo] working group. IPv6 stacks for constrained node networks | [IETF_6lo] working group. IPv6 stacks for constrained node networks | |||
| use a variation of the 6LoWPAN stack applied to each particular link | use a variation of the 6LoWPAN stack applied to each particular link | |||
| layer technology. | layer technology. | |||
| In the 6LoPWAN working group, the [RFC6568], "Design and Application | In the 6LoPWAN working group, the [RFC6568], "Design and Application | |||
| Spaces for 6LoWPANs" was published and it describes potential | Spaces for 6LoWPANs" was published and it describes potential | |||
| application scenarios and use cases for low-power wireless personal | application scenarios and use cases for low-power wireless personal | |||
| area networks. Hence, this 6lo applicability document aims to | area networks. Hence, this 6lo applicability document aims to | |||
| provide guidance to an audience who is new to IPv6-over-lowpower | provide guidance to an audience who are new to IPv6-over-low-power | |||
| networks concept and wants to assess if variance of 6LoWPAN stack | networks concept and want to assess if variance of 6LoWPAN stack | |||
| [6lo] can be applied to the constrained L2 network of their interest. | [6lo] can be applied to the constrained layer two (L2) network of | |||
| This 6lo applicability document puts together various design space | their interest. This 6lo applicability document puts together | |||
| dimensions such as deployment, network size, power source, | various design space dimensions such as deployment, network size, | |||
| connectivity, multi-hop communication, traffic pattern, security | power source, connectivity, multi-hop communication, traffic pattern, | |||
| level, mobility, and QoS requirements etc. And it described a few | security level, mobility, and QoS requirements etc. In addition, it | |||
| set of 6LoPWAN application scenarios and practical deployment as | describes a few set of 6LoPWAN application scenarios and practical | |||
| examples. | deployment as examples. | |||
| This document provides the applicability and use cases of 6lo, | This document provides the applicability and use cases of 6lo, | |||
| considering the following aspects: | considering the following aspects: | |||
| o 6lo applicability and use cases MAY be uniquely different from | o 6lo applicability and use cases MAY be uniquely different from | |||
| those of 6LoWPAN defined for IEEE 802.15.4. | those of 6LoWPAN defined for IEEE 802.15.4. | |||
| o It SHOULD cover various IoT related wire/wireless link layer | o It SHOULD cover various IoT related wire/wireless link layer | |||
| technologies providing practical information of such technologies. | technologies providing practical information of such technologies. | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 26 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 29 ¶ | |||
| 2. Conventions and Terminology | 2. Conventions and Terminology | |||
| 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]. | |||
| 3. 6lo Link layer technologies and possible candidates | 3. 6lo Link layer technologies and possible candidates | |||
| 3.1. ITU-T G.9959 (specified) | 3.1. ITU-T G.9959 (specified) | |||
| The ITU-T G.9959 recommendation [G.9959] targets low-power Personal | The ITU-T G.9959 Recommendation [G.9959] targets low-power Personal | |||
| Area Networks (PANs). G.9959 defines how a unique 32-bit HomeID | Area Networks (PANs), and defines physical layer and link layer | |||
| functionality. Physical layers of 9.6 kbit/s, 40 kbit/s and 100 | ||||
| kbit/s are supported. G.9959 defines how a unique 32-bit HomeID | ||||
| network identifier is assigned by a network controller and how an | network identifier is assigned by a network controller and how an | |||
| 8-bit NodeID host identifier is allocated to each node. NodeIDs are | 8-bit NodeID host identifier is allocated to each node. NodeIDs are | |||
| unique within the network identified by the HomeID. The G.9959 | unique within the network identified by the HomeID. The G.9959 | |||
| HomeID represents an IPv6 subnet that is identified by one or more | HomeID represents an IPv6 subnet that is identified by one or more | |||
| IPv6 prefixes [RFC7428]. The ITU-T G.9959 can be used for smart home | IPv6 prefixes [RFC7428]. The ITU-T G.9959 can be used for smart home | |||
| applications. | applications. | |||
| 3.2. Bluetooth LE (specified) | 3.2. Bluetooth LE (specified) | |||
| Bluetooth LE was introduced in Bluetooth 4.0, enhanced in Bluetooth | Bluetooth LE was introduced in Bluetooth 4.0, enhanced in Bluetooth | |||
| 4.1, and developed even further in successive versions. Bluetooth | 4.1, and developed even further in successive versions. Bluetooth | |||
| SIG has also published Internet Protocol Support Profile (IPSP). The | SIG has also published Internet Protocol Support Profile (IPSP). The | |||
| IPSP enables discovery of IP-enabled devices and establishment of | IPSP enables discovery of IP-enabled devices and establishment of | |||
| link-layer connection for transporting IPv6 packets. IPv6 over | link-layer connection for transporting IPv6 packets. IPv6 over | |||
| Bluetooth LE is dependent on both Bluetooth 4.1 and IPSP 1.0 or | Bluetooth LE is dependent on both Bluetooth 4.1 and IPSP 1.0 or | |||
| newer. | newer. | |||
| Devices such as mobile phones, notebooks, tablets and other handheld | Many Devices such as mobile phones, notebooks, tablets and other | |||
| computing devices which will include Bluetooth 4.1 chipsets will | handheld computing devices which support Bluetooth 4.0 or subsequent | |||
| probably also have the low-energy variant of Bluetooth. Bluetooth LE | chipsets also support the low-energy variant of Bluetooth. Bluetooth | |||
| will also be included in many different types of accessories that | LE is also being included in many different types of accessories that | |||
| collaborate with mobile devices such as phones, tablets and notebook | collaborate with mobile devices such as phones, tablets and notebook | |||
| computers. An example of a use case for a Bluetooth LE accessory is | computers. An example of a use case for a Bluetooth LE accessory is | |||
| a heart rate monitor that sends data via the mobile phone to a server | a heart rate monitor that sends data via the mobile phone to a server | |||
| on the Internet [RFC7668]. A typical usage of Bluetooth LE is | on the Internet [RFC7668]. A typical usage of Bluetooth LE is | |||
| smartphone-based interaction with constrained devices. | smartphone-based interaction with constrained devices. Bluetooth LE | |||
| was originally designed to enable star topology networks. However, | ||||
| recent Bluetooth versions support the formation of extended | ||||
| topologies, and IPv6 support for mesh networks of Bluetooth LE | ||||
| devices is being developed [I-D.ietf-6lo-blemesh] | ||||
| 3.3. DECT-ULE (specified) | 3.3. DECT-ULE (specified) | |||
| 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 services, such as voice communication, | support both circuit switched services, such as voice communication, | |||
| and packet mode data services at modest data rate. | and packet mode data services at modest data rate. | |||
| 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 49 ¶ | |||
| 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 the usage of this broadcast service has not yet | |||
| been standardized for higher layers [RFC8105]. DECT-ULE can be used | been standardized for higher layers [RFC8105]. DECT-ULE can be used | |||
| for smart metering in a home. | for smart metering in a home. | |||
| 3.4. MS/TP (specified) | 3.4. MS/TP (specified) | |||
| MS/TP is a contention-free access method for the RS-485 physical | Master-Slave/Token-Passing (MS/TP) is a Medium Access Control (MAC) | |||
| layer, which is used extensively in building automation networks. | protocol for the RS-485 [TIA-485-A] physical layer and is used | |||
| primarily in building automation networks. | ||||
| An MS/TP device is typically based on a low-cost microcontroller with | An MS/TP device is typically based on a low-cost microcontroller with | |||
| limited processing power and memory. Together with low data rates | limited processing power and memory. These constraints, together | |||
| and a small address space, these constraints are similar to those | with low data rates and a small MAC address space, are similar to | |||
| faced in 6LoWPAN networks and suggest some elements of that solution | those faced in 6LoWPAN networks. MS/TP differs significantly from | |||
| might be leveraged. MS/TP differs significantly from 6LoWPAN in at | 6LoWPAN in at least three respects: a) MS/TP devices are typically | |||
| least three aspects: a) MS/TP devices typically have a continuous | mains powered, b) all MS/TP devices on a segment can communicate | |||
| source of power, b) all MS/TP devices on a segment can communicate | ||||
| directly so there are no hidden node or mesh routing issues, and c) | directly so there are no hidden node or mesh routing issues, and c) | |||
| recent changes to MS/TP provide support for large payloads, | the latest MS/TP specification provides support for large payloads, | |||
| eliminating the need for link-layer fragmentation and reassembly. | eliminating the need for fragmentation and reassembly below IPv6. | |||
| MS/TP is designed to enable multidrop networks over shielded twisted | MS/TP is designed to enable multidrop networks over shielded twisted | |||
| pair wiring, although not according to standards, in lower speeds, | pair wiring. It can support network segments up to 1000 meters in | |||
| normally 9600 bit/s, re-purposed telecom wiring is widely in use, | length at a data rate of 115.2 kbit/s or segments up to 1200 meters | |||
| keeping deployment cost down. It can support a data rate of 115,200 | in length at lower bit rates. An MS/TP interface requires only a | |||
| baud on segments up to 1000 meters in length, or segments up to 1200 | UART, an RS-485 [TIA-485-A] transceiver with a driver that can be | |||
| meters in length at lower baud rates. An MS/TP link requires only a | disabled, and a 5 ms resolution timer. The MS/TP MAC is typically | |||
| UART, an RS-485 transceiver with a driver that can be disabled, and a | implemented in software. | |||
| 5ms resolution timer. These features make MS/TP a cost-effective and | ||||
| very reliable field bus for the most numerous and least expensive | Because of its superior "range" (~1 km) compared to many low power | |||
| devices in a building automation network [RFC8163]. MS/TP can be | wireless data links, MS/TP may be suitable to connect remote devices | |||
| used for the management of district heating. | (such as district heating controllers) to the nearest building | |||
| control infrastructure over a single link [RFC8163]. MS/TP can be | ||||
| used for building automation networks. | ||||
| 3.5. NFC (specified) | 3.5. NFC (specified) | |||
| NFC technology enables simple and safe two-way interactions between | NFC technology enables simple and safe two-way interactions between | |||
| electronic devices, allowing consumers to perform contactless | electronic devices, allowing consumers to perform contactless | |||
| transactions, access digital content, and connect electronic devices | transactions, access digital content, and connect electronic devices | |||
| with a single touch. NFC complements many popular consumer level | with a single touch. NFC complements many popular consumer level | |||
| wireless technologies, by utilizing the key elements in existing | wireless technologies, by utilizing the key elements in existing | |||
| standards for contactless card technology (ISO/IEC 14443 A&B and | standards for contactless card technology (ISO/IEC 14443 A&B and | |||
| JIS-X 6319-4). NFC can be compatible with existing contactless card | JIS-X 6319-4). NFC can be compatible with existing contactless card | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 7 ¶ | |||
| simple touch. | simple touch. | |||
| NFC's bidirectional communication ability is ideal for establishing | NFC's bidirectional communication ability is ideal for establishing | |||
| connections with other technologies by the simplicity of touch. In | connections with other technologies by the simplicity of touch. In | |||
| addition to the easy connection and quick transactions, simple data | addition to the easy connection and quick transactions, simple data | |||
| sharing is also available [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc]. NFC can be used for | sharing is also available [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc]. NFC can be used for | |||
| secure transfer in healthcare services. | secure transfer in healthcare services. | |||
| 3.6. PLC (specified) | 3.6. PLC (specified) | |||
| Unlike other dedicated communication infrastructure, the required | PLC is a data transmission technique that utilizes power conductors | |||
| medium (power conductor) is widely available indoors and outdoors. | as medium. Unlike other dedicated communication infrastructure, | |||
| power conductors are widely available indoors and outdoors. | ||||
| Moreover, wired technologies are more susceptible to cause | Moreover, wired technologies are more susceptible to cause | |||
| interference but are more reliable than their wireless counterparts. | interference but are more reliable than their wireless counterparts. | |||
| PLC is a data transmission technique that utilizes power conductors | PLC is a data transmission technique that utilizes power conductors | |||
| as medium. | as medium. | |||
| The below table shows some available open standards defining PLC. | The below table shows some available open standards defining PLC. | |||
| +-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+ | +-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+ | |||
| | PLC Systems | Frequency Range | Type | Data Rate | Distance | | | PLC Systems | Frequency Range | Type | Data Rate | Distance | | |||
| +-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+ | +-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+ | |||
| | IEEE1901 | <100MHz | Broadband | 200Mbps | 1000m | | | IEEE1901 | <100MHz | Broadband | 200Mbps | 1000m | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | IEEE1901.1 | <15MHz | PLC-IoT | 10Mbps | 2000m | | | IEEE1901.1 | <15MHz | PLC-IoT | 10Mbps | 2000m | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | IEEE1901.2 | <500kHz | Narrowband | 200Kbps | 3000m | | | IEEE1901.2 | <500kHz | Narrowband | 200Kbps | 3000m | | |||
| +-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+ | +-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+ | |||
| Table 1: Some Available Open Standards in PLC | Table 1: Some Available Open Standards in PLC | |||
| [IEEE1901] defines broadband variant of PLC but is effective within | [IEEE1901] defines a broadband variant of PLC but is effective within | |||
| short range. This standard addresses the requirements of | short range. This standard addresses the requirements of | |||
| applications with high data rate such as: Internet, HDTV, Audio, | applications with high data rate such as: Internet, HDTV, Audio, | |||
| Gaming etc. Broadband operates on OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency | Gaming etc. Broadband operates on OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency | |||
| Division Multiplexing) modulation. | Division Multiplexing) modulation. | |||
| [IEEE1901.2] defines narrowband variant of PLC with less data rate | [IEEE1901.2] defines a narrowband variant of PLC with less data rate | |||
| but significantly higher transmission range that could be used in an | but significantly higher transmission range that could be used in an | |||
| indoor or even an outdoor environment. It is applicable to typical | indoor or even an outdoor environment. It is applicable to typical | |||
| IoT applications such as: Building Automation, Renewable Energy, | IoT applications such as: Building Automation, Renewable Energy, | |||
| Advanced Metering, Street Lighting, Electric Vehicle, Smart Grid etc. | Advanced Metering, Street Lighting, Electric Vehicle, Smart Grid etc. | |||
| Moreover, IEEE 1901.2 standard is based on the 802.15.4 MAC sub-layer | Moreover, IEEE 1901.2 standard is based on the 802.15.4 MAC sub-layer | |||
| and fully endorses the security scheme defined in 802.15.4. | and fully endorses the security scheme defined in 802.15.4 [RFC8036]. | |||
| [RFC8036]. A typical use case of PLC is smart grid. | A typical use case of PLC is smart grid. | |||
| 3.7. IEEE 802.15.4e (specified) | 3.7. IEEE 802.15.4e (specified) | |||
| The Time Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) mode was introduced in the | The Time Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) mode was introduced in the | |||
| IEEE 802.15.4-2015 standard. In a TSCH network, all nodes are | IEEE 802.15.4-2015 standard. In a TSCH network, all nodes are | |||
| synchronized. Time is sliced up into timeslots. The duration of a | synchronized. Time is sliced up into timeslots. The duration of a | |||
| timeslot, typically 10ms, is large enough for a node to send a full- | timeslot, typically 10ms, is large enough for a node to send a full- | |||
| sized frame to its neighbor, and for that neighbor to send back an | sized frame to its neighbor, and for that neighbor to send back an | |||
| acknowledgment to indicate successful reception. Timeslots are | acknowledgment to indicate successful reception. Timeslots are | |||
| grouped into one of more slotframes, which repeat over time. | grouped into one of more slotframes, which repeat over time. | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 38 ¶ | |||
| offer over a decade of battery lifetime. | offer over a decade of battery lifetime. | |||
| - 6TiSCH at IETF defines communications of TSCH network and it | - 6TiSCH at IETF defines communications of TSCH network and it | |||
| uses 6LoWPAN stack [RFC7554]. | uses 6LoWPAN stack [RFC7554]. | |||
| IEEE 802.15.4e can be used for industrial automation. | IEEE 802.15.4e can be used for industrial automation. | |||
| 3.8. LTE MTC (example of a potential candidate) | 3.8. LTE MTC (example of a potential candidate) | |||
| LTE category defines the overall performance and capabilities of the | LTE category defines the overall performance and capabilities of the | |||
| UE(User Equipment). For example, the maximum down rate of category 1 | UE (User Equipment). For example, the maximum down rate of category | |||
| UE and category 2 UE are 10.3 Mbit/s and 51.0 Mbit/s respectively. | 1 UE and category 2 UE are 10.3 Mbit/s and 51.0 Mbit/s respectively. | |||
| There are many categories in LTE standard. 3GPP standards defined the | There are many categories in LTE standards. 3GPP standards defined | |||
| category 0 to be used for low rate IoT service in release 12. Since | the category 0 to be used for low rate IoT service in release 12. | |||
| category 1 and category 0 could be used for low rate IoT service, | Since category 1 and category 0 could be used for low rate IoT | |||
| these categories are called LTE MTC (Machine Type Communication) | service, these categories are called LTE MTC (Machine Type | |||
| [LTE_MTC]. | Communication) [LTE_MTC]. And 3GPP standards defined the MTC | |||
| Enhancements in release 13. | ||||
| LTE MTC offer advantages in comparison to above category 2 and is | LTE MTC offer advantages in comparison to above category 2 and is | |||
| appropriate to be used for low rate IoT services such as low power | appropriate to be used for low rate IoT services such as low power | |||
| and low cost. LTE MTC can be used for a gateway of a wireless | and low cost. | |||
| bachhaul network. | ||||
| LTE MTC can be used for tracking services, such as asset tracker, | ||||
| bicycle/cat tracker and etc with national wide. LTE MTC can be also | ||||
| used for monitoring & control service, such as car mobility record | ||||
| and weather observation that require much more traffic than other IoT | ||||
| services. Since the traffic collected by other IoT devices such as | ||||
| LoRa, Z-wave and BLE is small, LTE MTC can be used as a bachhaul of | ||||
| other IoT networks. | ||||
| 3.9. Comparison between 6lo Link layer technologies | 3.9. Comparison between 6lo Link layer technologies | |||
| In above clauses, various 6lo Link layer technologies and a possible | In above clauses, various 6lo Link layer technologies and a possible | |||
| candidate are described. The following table shows that dominant | candidate are described. The following table shows that dominant | |||
| paramters of each use case corresponding to the 6lo link layer | paramters of each use case corresponding to the 6lo link layer | |||
| technology. | technology. | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | | Z-Wave | BLE |DECT-ULE| MS/TP | NFC | PLC | TSCH | | | | Z-Wave | BLE |DECT-ULE| MS/TP | NFC | PLC | TSCH | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | | Home |Interact| | | Health-| |Industr-| | | | Home |Interact| |Building| Health-| |Industr-| | |||
| | Usage | Auto- |w/ Smart| Meter |District| care | Smart |ial Aut-| | | Usage | Auto- |w/ Smart| Meter | Auto- | care | Smart |ial Aut-| | |||
| | | mation | Phone | Reading| Heating| Service| Grid | mation | | | | mation | Phone | Reading| mation | Service| Grid | mation | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | Topology | L2-mesh| Star | Star | Bus | P2P | Star | | | | Topology | L2-mesh| Star | Star | MS/TP | P2P | Star | | | |||
| | & | or | | | | | Tree | Mesh | | | & | or | & | | | | Tree | Mesh | | |||
| | Subnet | L3-mesh| No mesh| No mesh| MS/TP | L2-mesh| Mesh | | | | Subnet | L3-mesh| Mesh | No mesh| No mesh| L2-mesh| Mesh | | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Mobility | No | Low | No | No |Moderate| No | No | | | Mobility | No | Low | No | No |Moderate| No | No | | |||
| | Reqmt | | | | | | | | | | Reqmt | | | | | | | | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | | High + | | High + | High + | | High + | High + | | | | High + | | High + | High + | | High + | High + | | |||
| | Security | Privacy| Parti- | Privacy| Authen.| High |Encrypt.| Privacy| | | Security | Privacy| Parti- | Privacy| Authen.| High |Encrypt.| Privacy| | |||
| | Reqmt |required| ally |required|required| |required|required| | | Reqmt |required| ally |required|required| |required|required| | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Buffering | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | | | Buffering | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | | |||
| | Reqmpt | | | | | | | | | | Reqmt | | | | | | | | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | Latency, | | | | | | | | | | Latency, | | | | | | | | | |||
| | QoS | High | Low | Low | High | High | Low | High | | | QoS | High | Low | Low | High | High | Low | High | | |||
| | Reqmt | | | | | | | | | | Reqmt | | | | | | | | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
| | Data |Infrequ-|Infrequ-|Infrequ-|Frequent| Small |Infrequ-|Infrequ-| | | Data |Infrequ-|Infrequ-|Infrequ-|Frequent| Small |Infrequ-|Infrequ-| | |||
| | Rate | ent | ent | ent | | | ent | ent | | | Rate | ent | ent | ent | | | ent | ent | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| | RFC # | | | | | draft- | draft- | | | | RFC # | | | | | draft- | draft- | | | |||
| | or | RFC7428| RFC7668| RFC8105| RFC8163|ietf-6lo|hou-6lo-| RFC7554| | | or | RFC7428| RFC7668| RFC8105| RFC8163|ietf-6lo|hou-6lo-| RFC7554| | |||
| | Draft | | | | | -nfc | plc | | | | Draft | | | | | -nfc | plc | | | |||
| +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | +-----------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |||
| Table 2: Comparison between 6lo Link layer technologies | Table 2: Comparison between 6lo Link layer technologies | |||
| 4. 6lo Deployment Scenarios | 4. 6lo Deployment Scenarios | |||
| 4.1. jupitermesh in Smart Grid using 6lo in network layer | 4.1. jupitermesh in Smart Grid using 6lo in network layer | |||
| jupiterMesh is a multi-hop wireless mesh network specification | jupiterMesh is a multi-hop wireless mesh network specification | |||
| designed mainly for deployment in large geographical areas. Each | designed mainly for deployment in large geographical areas. Each | |||
| subnet in jupiterMesh is able to cover an entire neighborhood with | subnet in jupiterMesh is able to cover an entire neighborhood with | |||
| thousands of nodes consisting of IPv6-enabled routers and end-points | thousands of nodes consisting of IPv6-enabled routers and end-points | |||
| (e.g., hosts). Automated network joining and load balancing allows a | (e.g. hosts). Automated network joining and load balancing allows a | |||
| seamless deployment of a large number of subnets. | seamless deployment of a large number of subnets. | |||
| The main application domains targeted by jupiterMesh are smart grid | The main application domains targeted by jupiterMesh are smart grid | |||
| and smart cities. This includes, but is not limited to the following | and smart cities. This includes, but is not limited to the following | |||
| applications: | applications: | |||
| o Automated meter reading | o Automated meter reading | |||
| o Distribution Automation (DA) | o Distribution Automation (DA) | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 36 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 36 ¶ | |||
| o Very low power modes in development permitting long term battery | o Very low power modes in development permitting long term battery | |||
| operation of network nodes | operation of network nodes | |||
| In the Wi-SUN FAN specification, adaptation layer based on 6lo and | In the Wi-SUN FAN specification, adaptation layer based on 6lo and | |||
| IPv6 network layer are described. So, IPv6 protocol suite including | IPv6 network layer are described. So, IPv6 protocol suite including | |||
| TCP/UDP, 6lo Adaptation, Header Compression, DHCPv6 for IP address | TCP/UDP, 6lo Adaptation, Header Compression, DHCPv6 for IP address | |||
| management, Routing using RPL, ICMPv6, and Unicast/Multicast | management, Routing using RPL, ICMPv6, and Unicast/Multicast | |||
| forwarding is utilized. | forwarding is utilized. | |||
| 4.3. G3-PLC usage of 6lo in network layer | ||||
| G3-PLC [G3-PLC] is a narrow-band PLC technology that is based on | ||||
| ITU-T G.9903 Recommendation [G.9903]. G3-PLC supports multi-hop mesh | ||||
| network, and facilitates highly-reliable, long-range communication. | ||||
| With the abilities to support IPv6 and to cross transformers, G3-PLC | ||||
| is regarded as one of the next-generation NB-PLC technologies. | ||||
| G3-PLC has got massive deployments over several countries, e.g. | ||||
| Japan and France. | ||||
| The main application domains targeted by G3-PLC are smart grid and | ||||
| smart cities. This includes, but is not limited to the following | ||||
| applications: | ||||
| o Smart Metering | ||||
| o Vehicle-to-Grid Communication | ||||
| o Demand Response (DR) | ||||
| o Distribution Automation | ||||
| o Home/Building Energy Management Systems | ||||
| o Smart Street Lighting | ||||
| o Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) backbone network | ||||
| o Wind/Solar Farm Monitoring | ||||
| In the G3-PLC specification, the 6lo adaptation layer utilizes the | ||||
| 6LoWPAN functions (e.g. header compression, fragmentation and | ||||
| reassembly) so as to enable IPv6 packet transmission. LOADng, which | ||||
| is a lightweight variant of AODV, is applied as the mesh-under | ||||
| routing protocol in G3-PLC networks. Address assignment and network | ||||
| configuration are based on the bootstrapping protocol specified in | ||||
| ITU-T G.9903. The network layer consists of IPv6 and ICMPv6 while | ||||
| the transport protocol UDP is used for data transmission. | ||||
| 4.4. Netricity usage of 6lo in network layer | ||||
| The Netricity program in HomePlug Powerline Alliance [NETRICITY] | ||||
| promotes the adoption of products built on the IEEE 1901.2 Low- | ||||
| Frequency Narrow-Band PLC standard, which provides for urban and long | ||||
| distance communications and propagation through transformers of the | ||||
| distribution network using frequencies below 500 kHz. The technology | ||||
| also addresses requirements that assure communication privacy and | ||||
| secure networks. | ||||
| The main application domains targeted by Netricity are smart grid and | ||||
| smart cities. This includes, but is not limited to the following | ||||
| applications: | ||||
| o Utility grid modernization | ||||
| o Distribution automation | ||||
| o Meter-to-Grid connectivity | ||||
| o Micro-grids | ||||
| o Grid sensor communications | ||||
| o Load control | ||||
| o Demand response | ||||
| o Net metering | ||||
| o Street Lighting control | ||||
| o Photovoltaic panel monitoring | ||||
| Netricity system architecture is based on the PHY and MAC layers of | ||||
| IEEE 1901.2 PLC standard. Regarding the 6lo adaptation layer and | ||||
| IPv6 network layer, Netricity utilizes IPv6 protocol suite including | ||||
| 6lo/6LoWPAN header compression, DHCPv6 for IP address management, RPL | ||||
| routing protocol, ICMPv6, and unicast/multicast forwarding. Note | ||||
| that the layer 3 routing in Netricity uses RPL in non-storing mode | ||||
| with the MRHOF objective function based on the own defined Estimated | ||||
| Transmission Time (ETT) metric. | ||||
| 5. Design Space and Guidelines for 6lo Deployment | 5. Design Space and Guidelines for 6lo Deployment | |||
| 5.1. Design Space Dimensions for 6lo Deployment | 5.1. Design Space Dimensions for 6lo Deployment | |||
| The [RFC6568] lists the dimensions used to describe the design space | The [RFC6568] lists the dimensions used to describe the design space | |||
| of wireless sensor networks in the context of the 6LoWPAN working | of wireless sensor networks in the context of the 6LoWPAN working | |||
| group. The design space is already limited by the unique | group. The design space is already limited by the unique | |||
| characteristics of a LoWPAN (e.g., low power, short range, low bit | characteristics of a LoWPAN (e.g. low power, short range, low bit | |||
| rate). In [RFC6568], design space dimensions are described; | rate). In [RFC6568], the following design space dimensions are | |||
| Deployment, Network size, Power source, Connectivity, Multi-hop | described: Deployment, Network size, Power source, Connectivity, | |||
| communication, Traffic pattern, Mobility, Quality of Service (QoS). | Multi-hop communication, Traffic pattern, Mobility, Quality of | |||
| However, in this document, the following design space dimensions are | Service (QoS). However, in this document, the following design space | |||
| considered: | dimensions are considered: | |||
| o Deployment/Bootstrapping: 6lo nodes can be connected randomly, or | o Deployment/Bootstrapping: 6lo nodes can be connected randomly, or | |||
| in an organized manner. The bootstrapping has different | in an organized manner. The bootstrapping has different | |||
| characteristics for each link layer technology. | characteristics for each link layer technology. | |||
| o Topology: Topology of 6lo networks may inherently follow the | o Topology: Topology of 6lo networks may inherently follow the | |||
| characteristics of each link layer technology. Point-to-point, | characteristics of each link layer technology. Point-to-point, | |||
| star, tree or mesh topologies can be configured, depending on the | star, tree or mesh topologies can be configured, depending on the | |||
| link layer technology considered. | link layer technology considered. | |||
| o L2-Mesh or L3-Mesh: L2-mesh and L3-mesh may inherently follow the | o L2-Mesh or L3-Mesh: L2-mesh and L3-mesh may inherently follow the | |||
| characteristics of each link layer technology. Some link layer | characteristics of each link layer technology. Some link layer | |||
| technologies may support L2-mesh and some may not support. | technologies may support L2-mesh and some may not support. | |||
| o Multi-link subnet, single subnet: The selection of multi-link | o Multi-link subnet, single subnet: The selection of multi-link | |||
| subnet and single subnet depends on connectivity and the number of | subnet and single subnet depends on connectivity and the number of | |||
| 6lo nodes. | 6lo nodes. | |||
| o Data rate: Originally, the link layer technologies of 6lo have low | o Data rate: Typically, the link layer technologies of 6lo have low | |||
| rate of data transmission. But, by adjusting the MTU, it can | rate of data transmission. But, by adjusting the MTU, it can | |||
| deliver higher data rate. | deliver higher upper layer data rate. | |||
| o Buffering requirements: Some 6lo use case may require more data | o Buffering requirements: Some 6lo use case may require more data | |||
| rate than the link layer technology support. In this case, a | rate than the link layer technology support. In this case, a | |||
| buffering mechanism to manage the data is required. | buffering mechanism to manage the data is required. | |||
| o Security and Privacy Requirements: Some 6lo use case can involve | o Security and Privacy Requirements: Some 6lo use case can involve | |||
| transferring some important and personal data between 6lo nodes. | transferring some important and personal data between 6lo nodes. | |||
| In this case, high-level security support is required. | In this case, high-level security support is required. | |||
| o Mobility across 6lo networks and subnets: The movement of 6lo | o Mobility across 6lo networks and subnets: The movement of 6lo | |||
| nodes is dependent on the 6lo use case. If the 6lo nodes can move | nodes depends on the 6lo use case. If the 6lo nodes can move or | |||
| or moved around, it requires a mobility management mechanism. | moved around, a mobility management mechanism is required. | |||
| o Time synchronization requirements: The requirement of time | o Time synchronization requirements: The requirement of time | |||
| synchronization of the upper layer service is dependent on the 6lo | synchronization of the upper layer service is dependent on the 6lo | |||
| use case. For some 6lo use case related to health service, the | use case. For some 6lo use case related to health service, the | |||
| measured data must be recorded with exact time and must be | measured data must be recorded with exact time and must be | |||
| transferred with time synchronization. | transferred with time synchronization. | |||
| o Reliability and QoS: Some 6lo use case requires high reliability, | o Reliability and QoS: Some 6lo use case requires high reliability, | |||
| for example real-time service or health-related services. | for example real-time service or health-related services. | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 16, line 51 ¶ | |||
| layer technology defines a particular power use strategy which may | layer technology defines a particular power use strategy which may | |||
| be tuned [I-D.ietf-lwig-energy-efficient]. Readers are expected | be tuned [I-D.ietf-lwig-energy-efficient]. Readers are expected | |||
| to be familiar with [RFC7228] terminology. | to be familiar with [RFC7228] terminology. | |||
| o Update firmware requirements: Most 6lo use cases will need a | o Update firmware requirements: Most 6lo use cases will need a | |||
| mechanism for updating firmware. In these cases support for over | mechanism for updating firmware. In these cases support for over | |||
| the air updates are required, probably in a broadcast mode when | the air updates are required, probably in a broadcast mode when | |||
| bandwith is low and the number of identical devices is high. | bandwith is low and the number of identical devices is high. | |||
| o Wired vs. Wireless: Plenty of 6lo link layer technologies are | o Wired vs. Wireless: Plenty of 6lo link layer technologies are | |||
| wireless except MS/TP and PLC. The selection of wired or wireless | wireless, except MS/TP and PLC. The selection of wired or | |||
| link layer technology is mainly dependent on the requirement of | wireless link layer technology is mainly dependent on the | |||
| 6lo use cases and the characteristics of wired/wireless | requirement of 6lo use cases and the characteristics of wired/ | |||
| technologies. For example, some 6lo use cases may require easy | wireless technologies. For example, some 6lo use cases may | |||
| and quick deployment and some 6lo use cases may require continuous | require easy and quick deployment, whereas others may need a | |||
| source of power. | continuous source of power. | |||
| 5.2. Guidelines for adopting IPv6 stack (6lo/6LoWPAN) | 5.2. Guidelines for adopting IPv6 stack (6lo/6LoWPAN) | |||
| The following guideline targets candidates for new constrained L2 | The following guideline targets new candidate constrained L2 | |||
| technologies that consider running modified 6LoWPAN stack. The | technologies that may be considered for running modified 6LoWPAN | |||
| modification of 6LoWPAN stack should be based on the following: | stack on top. The modification of 6LoWPAN stack should be based on | |||
| the following: | ||||
| o Addressing Model: Addressing model determines whether the device | o Addressing Model: Addressing model determines whether the device | |||
| is capable of forming IPv6 Link-local and global addresses and | is capable of forming IPv6 Link-local and global addresses and | |||
| what is the best way to derive the IPv6 addresses for the | what is the best way to derive the IPv6 addresses for the | |||
| constrained L2 devices. Whether the device is capable of forming | constrained L2 devices. Whether the device is capable of forming | |||
| IPv6 Link-local and global addresses, L2-address-derived IPv6 | IPv6 Link-local and global addresses, L2-address-derived IPv6 | |||
| addresses are specified in [RFC4944], but there exist implications | addresses are specified in [RFC4944], but there exist implications | |||
| for privacy. For global usage, a unique IPv6 address must be | for privacy. For global usage, a unique IPv6 address must be | |||
| derived using an assigned prefix and a unique interface ID. | derived using an assigned prefix and a unique interface ID. | |||
| [RFC8065] provides such guidelines. For MAC derived IPv6 address, | [RFC8065] provides such guidelines. For MAC derived IPv6 address, | |||
| please refer to [RFC8163] for IPv6 address mapping examples. | please refer to [RFC8163] for IPv6 address mapping examples. | |||
| Broadcast and multicast support are dependent on the L2 networks. | Broadcast and multicast support are dependent on the L2 networks. | |||
| Most lowpower L2 implementations map multicast to broadcast | Most low-power L2 implementations map multicast to broadcast | |||
| networks. So care must be taken in the design when to use | networks. So care must be taken in the design when to use | |||
| broadcast and try to stick to unicast messaging whenever possible. | broadcast and try to stick to unicast messaging whenever possible. | |||
| o MTU Considerations: The deployment SHOULD consider their need for | o MTU Considerations: The deployment SHOULD consider their need for | |||
| maximum transmission unit of a packet (MTU) over the link layer | maximum transmission unit (MTU) of a packet over the link layer | |||
| and should consider if fragmentation and reassembly of packets are | and should consider if fragmentation and reassembly of packets are | |||
| needed at the 6LoWPAN layer. For example, if the link-layer | needed at the 6LoWPAN layer. For example, if the link layer | |||
| supports fragmentation and reassembly of packets, then 6LoWPAN | supports fragmentation and reassembly of packets, then 6LoWPAN | |||
| layer may skip supporting fragmentation/reassembly. In fact, for | layer may skip supporting fragmentation/reassembly. In fact, for | |||
| most efficiency, choosing a low-power link-layer that can carry | most efficiency, choosing a low-power link layer that can carry | |||
| unfragmented application packets would be optimum for packet | unfragmented application packets would be optimum for packet | |||
| transmission if the deployment can afford it. Please refer to 6lo | transmission if the deployment can afford it. Please refer to 6lo | |||
| RFCs [RFC7668], [RFC8163], [RFC8105] for example guidance. | RFCs [RFC7668], [RFC8163], [RFC8105] for example guidance. | |||
| o Mesh or L3-Routing: 6LoWPAN specifications do provide mechanisms | o Mesh or L3-Routing: 6LoWPAN specifications do provide mechanisms | |||
| to support for mesh routing at L2. [RFC6550] defines L3 routing | to support for mesh routing at L2. [RFC6550] defines layer three | |||
| for low power lossy networks using directed graphs. 6LoWPAN is | (L3) routing for low power lossy networks using directed graphs. | |||
| routing protocol agnostic and other L2 or L3 routing protocols can | 6LoWPAN is routing protocol agnostic and other L2 or L3 routing | |||
| be run using a 6LoWPAN stack. | protocols can be run using a 6LoWPAN stack. | |||
| o Address Assignment: 6LoWPAN requires that IPv6 Neighbor Discovery | o Address Assignment: 6LoWPAN requires that IPv6 Neighbor Discovery | |||
| for low power networks [RFC6775] be used for autoconfiguration of | for low power networks [RFC6775] be used for autoconfiguration of | |||
| stateless IPv6 address assignment. Considering the energy | stateless IPv6 address assignment. Considering the energy | |||
| sensitive networks [RFC6775] makes optimization from classical | sensitive networks [RFC6775] makes optimization from classical | |||
| IPv6 ND [RFC4861] protocol. It is the responsibility of the | IPv6 ND [RFC4861] protocol. It is the responsibility of the | |||
| deployment to ensure unique global IPv6 addresses for the Internet | deployment to ensure unique global IPv6 addresses for the Internet | |||
| connectivity. For local-only connectivity IPv6 ULA may be used. | connectivity. For local-only connectivity IPv6 ULA may be used. | |||
| [RFC6775] specifies the 6LoWPAN border router(6LBR) which is | [RFC6775] specifies the 6LoWPAN border router(6LBR) which is | |||
| responsible for prefix assignment to the 6lo/6LoWPAN network. 6LBR | responsible for prefix assignment to the 6lo/6LoWPAN network. 6LBR | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 42 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 25 ¶ | |||
| business reasons and may choose to offer a separate address | business reasons and may choose to offer a separate address | |||
| assignment service. | assignment service. | |||
| o Header Compression: IPv6 header compression [RFC6282] is a vital | o Header Compression: IPv6 header compression [RFC6282] is a vital | |||
| part of IPv6 over low power communication. Examples of header | part of IPv6 over low power communication. Examples of header | |||
| compression for different link-layers specifications are found in | compression for different link-layers specifications are found in | |||
| [RFC7668], [RFC8163], [RFC8105]. A generic header compression | [RFC7668], [RFC8163], [RFC8105]. A generic header compression | |||
| technique is specified in [RFC7400]. | technique is specified in [RFC7400]. | |||
| o Security and Encryption: Though 6LoWPAN basic specifications do | o Security and Encryption: Though 6LoWPAN basic specifications do | |||
| not address security at network layer, the assumption is that L2 | not address security at the network layer, the assumption is that | |||
| security must be present. In addition, application level security | L2 security must be present. In addition, application level | |||
| is highly desirable. The working groups [ace] and [core] should | security is highly desirable. The working groups [ace] and [core] | |||
| be consulted for application and transport level security. 6lo | should be consulted for application and transport level security. | |||
| working group is working on address authentication [6lo-ap-nd] and | 6lo working group is working on address authentication [6lo-ap-nd] | |||
| secure bootstrapping is also being discussed at IETF. However, | and secure bootstrapping is also being discussed at IETF. | |||
| there may be different levels of security available in a | However, there may be different levels of security available in a | |||
| deployment through other standards such as hardware level security | deployment through other standards such as hardware level security | |||
| or certificates for initial booting process. Encryption is quite | or certificates for initial booting process. Encryption is | |||
| important if the implementation can afford it. | important if the implementation can afford it. | |||
| o Additional processing: [RFC8066] defines guidelines for ESC | o Additional processing: [RFC8066] defines guidelines for ESC | |||
| dispatch octets use in the 6LoWPAN header. An implementation may | dispatch octets use in the 6LoWPAN header. An implementation may | |||
| take advantage of ESC header to offer a deployment specific | take advantage of ESC header to offer a deployment specific | |||
| processing of 6LoWPAN packets. | processing of 6LoWPAN packets. | |||
| 6. 6lo Use Case Examples | 6. 6lo Use Case Examples | |||
| As IPv6 stacks for constrained node networks use a variation of the | As IPv6 stacks for constrained node networks use a variation of the | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 19, line 31 ¶ | |||
| the smartphone, which can forward the data to a cloud service on the | the smartphone, which can forward the data to a cloud service on the | |||
| Internet. In addition, the smartwatch can receive notifications | Internet. In addition, the smartwatch can receive notifications | |||
| (e.g. alarm signals) from the cloud service via the smartphone. On | (e.g. alarm signals) from the cloud service via the smartphone. On | |||
| the other hand, the smartphone may locally generate messages for the | the other hand, the smartphone may locally generate messages for the | |||
| smartwatch, such as e-mail reception or calendar notifications. | smartwatch, such as e-mail reception or calendar notifications. | |||
| The functionality supported by the smartwatch may be complemented by | The functionality supported by the smartwatch may be complemented by | |||
| other devices such as other on-body sensors, wireless headsets or | other devices such as other on-body sensors, wireless headsets or | |||
| head-mounted displays. All such devices may connect to the | head-mounted displays. All such devices may connect to the | |||
| smartphone creating a star topology network whereby the smartphone is | smartphone creating a star topology network whereby the smartphone is | |||
| the central component. | the central component. Support for extended network topologies (e.g. | |||
| mesh networks) is being developed as of the writing. | ||||
| 7. IANA Considerations | 7. IANA Considerations | |||
| There are no IANA considerations related to this document. | There are no IANA considerations related to this document. | |||
| 8. Security Considerations | 8. Security Considerations | |||
| Security considerations are not directly applicable to this document. | Security considerations are not directly applicable to this document. | |||
| The use cases will use the security requirements described in the | The use cases will use the security requirements described in the | |||
| protocol specifications. | protocol specifications. | |||
| 9. Acknowledgements | 9. Acknowledgements | |||
| Carles Gomez has been funded in part by the Spanish Government | Carles Gomez has been funded in part by the Spanish Government | |||
| (Ministerio de Educacion, Cultura y Deporte) through the Jose | through the Jose Castillejo CAS15/00336 grant, and through the | |||
| Castillejo grant CAS15/00336. His contribution to this work has been | TEC2016-79988-P grant. His contribution to this work has been | |||
| carried out in part during his stay as a visiting scholar at the | carried out in part during his stay as a visiting scholar at the | |||
| Computer Laboratory of the University of Cambridge. | Computer Laboratory of the University of Cambridge. | |||
| Thomas Watteyne, Pascal Thubert, Xavier Vilajosana, Daniel Migault, | Thomas Watteyne, Pascal Thubert, Xavier Vilajosana, Daniel Migault, | |||
| and Jianqiang HOU have provided valuable feedback for this draft. | and Jianqiang HOU have provided valuable feedback for this draft. | |||
| Das Subir and Michel Veillette have provided valuable information of | Das Subir and Michel Veillette have provided valuable information of | |||
| jupiterMesh and Paul Duffy has provided valuable information of Wi- | jupiterMesh and Paul Duffy has provided valuable information of Wi- | |||
| SUN for this draft. | SUN for this draft. Also, Jianqiang Hou has provided valuable | |||
| information of G3-PLC and Netricity for this draft. Kerry Lynn and | ||||
| Dave Robin have provided valuable information of MS/TP and practical | ||||
| use case of MS/TP for this draft. | ||||
| 10. References | 10. References | |||
| 10.1. Normative References | 10.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 37 ¶ | |||
| 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3315>. | 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3315>. | |||
| [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, | [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, | |||
| "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, | "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007, | DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4861>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4861>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc] | [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc] | |||
| Choi, Y., Hong, Y., Youn, J., Kim, D., and J. Choi, | Choi, Y., Hong, Y., Youn, J., Kim, D., and J. Choi, | |||
| "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Near Field | "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Near Field | |||
| Communication", draft-ietf-6lo-nfc-07 (work in progress), | Communication", draft-ietf-6lo-nfc-09 (work in progress), | |||
| June 2017. | January 2018. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-lwig-energy-efficient] | [I-D.ietf-lwig-energy-efficient] | |||
| Gomez, C., Kovatsch, M., Tian, H., and Z. Cao, "Energy- | Gomez, C., Kovatsch, M., Tian, H., and Z. Cao, "Energy- | |||
| Efficient Features of Internet of Things Protocols", | Efficient Features of Internet of Things Protocols", | |||
| draft-ietf-lwig-energy-efficient-08 (work in progress), | draft-ietf-lwig-energy-efficient-08 (work in progress), | |||
| October 2017. | October 2017. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-roll-aodv-rpl] | [I-D.ietf-roll-aodv-rpl] | |||
| Anamalamudi, S., Zhang, M., Sangi, A., Perkins, C., and S. | Anamalamudi, S., Zhang, M., Sangi, A., Perkins, C., and S. | |||
| Anand, "Asymmetric AODV-P2P-RPL in Low-Power and Lossy | Anand, "Asymmetric AODV-P2P-RPL in Low-Power and Lossy | |||
| Networks (LLNs)", draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-02 (work in | Networks (LLNs)", draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-02 (work in | |||
| progress), September 2017. | progress), September 2017. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-sf0] | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-sfx] | |||
| Dujovne, D., Grieco, L., Palattella, M., and N. Accettura, | Dujovne, D., Grieco, L., Palattella, M., and N. Accettura, | |||
| "6TiSCH 6top Scheduling Function Zero (SF0)", draft-ietf- | "6TiSCH 6top Scheduling Function Zero / Experimental | |||
| 6tisch-6top-sf0-05 (work in progress), July 2017. | (SFX)", draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-sfx-00 (work in progress), | |||
| September 2017. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-6lo-blemesh] | ||||
| Gomez, C., Darroudi, S., and T. Savolainen, "IPv6 Mesh | ||||
| over BLUETOOTH(R) Low Energy using IPSP", draft-ietf-6lo- | ||||
| blemesh-02 (work in progress), September 2017. | ||||
| [I-D.satish-6tisch-6top-sf1] | [I-D.satish-6tisch-6top-sf1] | |||
| Anamalamudi, S., Zhang, M., Sangi, A., Perkins, C., and S. | Anamalamudi, S., Liu, B., Zhang, M., Sangi, A., Perkins, | |||
| Anand, "Scheduling Function One (SF1) for hop-by-hop | C., and S. Anand, "Scheduling Function One (SF1): hop-by- | |||
| Scheduling in 6tisch Networks", draft-satish-6tisch-6top- | hop Scheduling with RSVP-TE in 6tisch Networks", draft- | |||
| sf1-03 (work in progress), February 2017. | satish-6tisch-6top-sf1-04 (work in progress), October | |||
| 2017. | ||||
| [I-D.hou-6lo-plc] | [I-D.hou-6lo-plc] | |||
| Hou, J., Hong, Y., and X. Tang, "Transmission of IPv6 | Hou, J., Hong, Y., and X. Tang, "Transmission of IPv6 | |||
| Packets over PLC Networks", draft-hou-6lo-plc-01 (work in | Packets over PLC Networks", draft-hou-6lo-plc-03 (work in | |||
| progress), June 2017. | progress), December 2017. | |||
| [IETF_6lo] | [IETF_6lo] | |||
| "IETF IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes | "IETF IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes | |||
| (6lo) working group", | (6lo) working group", | |||
| <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/6lo/charter/>. | <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/6lo/charter/>. | |||
| [TIA-485-A] | ||||
| "TIA, "Electrical Characteristics of Generators and | ||||
| Receivers for Use in Balanced Digital Multipoint Systems", | ||||
| TIA-485-A (Revision of TIA-485)", March 2003, | ||||
| <https://global.ihs.com/ | ||||
| doc_detail.cfm?item_s_key=00032964>. | ||||
| [G3-PLC] "G3-PLC Alliance", <http://www.g3-plc.com/home/>. | ||||
| [NETRICITY] | ||||
| "Netricity program in HomePlug Powerline Alliance", | ||||
| <http://groups.homeplug.org/tech/Netricity>. | ||||
| [G.9959] "International Telecommunication Union, "Short range | [G.9959] "International Telecommunication Union, "Short range | |||
| narrow-band digital radiocommunication transceivers - PHY | narrow-band digital radiocommunication transceivers - PHY | |||
| and MAC layer specifications", ITU-T Recommendation", | and MAC layer specifications", ITU-T Recommendation", | |||
| January 2015. | January 2015. | |||
| [G.9903] "International Telecommunication Union, "Narrowband | ||||
| orthogonal frequency division multiplexing power line | ||||
| communication transceivers for G3-PLC networks", ITU-T | ||||
| Recommendation", August 2017. | ||||
| [LTE_MTC] "3GPP TS 36.306 V13.0.0, 3rd Generation Partnership | [LTE_MTC] "3GPP TS 36.306 V13.0.0, 3rd Generation Partnership | |||
| Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access | Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access | |||
| Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access | Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access | |||
| (E-UTRA); User Equipment (UE) radio access capabilities | (E-UTRA); User Equipment (UE) radio access capabilities | |||
| (Release 13)", December 2015. | (Release 13)", December 2015. | |||
| [IEEE1901] | [IEEE1901] | |||
| "IEEE Standard, IEEE Std. 1901-2010 - IEEE Standard for | "IEEE Standard, IEEE Std. 1901-2010 - IEEE Standard for | |||
| Broadband over Power Line Networks: Medium Access Control | Broadband over Power Line Networks: Medium Access Control | |||
| and Physical Layer Specifications", 2010, | and Physical Layer Specifications", 2010, | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 24, line 34 ¶ | |||
| "IEEE Standard (work-in-progress), IEEE-SA Standards | "IEEE Standard (work-in-progress), IEEE-SA Standards | |||
| Board", <http://sites.ieee.org/sagroups-1901-1/>. | Board", <http://sites.ieee.org/sagroups-1901-1/>. | |||
| [IEEE1901.2] | [IEEE1901.2] | |||
| "IEEE Standard, IEEE Std. 1901.2-2013 - IEEE Standard for | "IEEE Standard, IEEE Std. 1901.2-2013 - IEEE Standard for | |||
| Low-Frequency (less than 500 kHz) Narrowband Power Line | Low-Frequency (less than 500 kHz) Narrowband Power Line | |||
| Communications for Smart Grid Applications", 2013, | Communications for Smart Grid Applications", 2013, | |||
| <https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/ | <https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/ | |||
| standard/1901.2-2013.html>. | standard/1901.2-2013.html>. | |||
| [BACnet] "ASHRAE, "BACnet-A Data Communication Protocol for | ||||
| Building Automation and Control Networks", ANSI/ASHRAE | ||||
| Standard 135-2016", January 2016, | ||||
| <http://www.techstreet.com/ashrae/standards/ | ||||
| ashrae-135-2016?product_id=1918140#jumps>. | ||||
| Appendix A. Other 6lo Use Case Examples | Appendix A. Other 6lo Use Case Examples | |||
| A.1. Use case of ITU-T G.9959: Smart Home | A.1. Use case of ITU-T G.9959: Smart Home | |||
| Z-Wave is one of the main technologies that may be used to enable | Z-Wave is one of the main technologies that may be used to enable | |||
| smart home applications. Born as a proprietary technology, Z-Wave | smart home applications. Born as a proprietary technology, Z-Wave | |||
| was specifically designed for this particular use case. Recently, | was specifically designed for this particular use case. Recently, | |||
| the Z-Wave radio interface (physical and MAC layers) has been | the Z-Wave radio interface (physical and MAC layers) has been | |||
| standardized as the ITU-T G.9959 specification. | standardized as the ITU-T G.9959 specification. | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 26, line 5 ¶ | |||
| transceiver. This device is in the coverage range of the Fixed Part | transceiver. This device is in the coverage range of the Fixed Part | |||
| of the home. The Fixed Part can act as a router connected to the | of the home. The Fixed Part can act as a router connected to the | |||
| Internet. This way, the smart meter can transmit electricity | Internet. This way, the smart meter can transmit electricity | |||
| consumption readings through the DECT-ULE link with the Fixed Part, | consumption readings through the DECT-ULE link with the Fixed Part, | |||
| and the latter can forward such readings to the utility company using | and the latter can forward such readings to the utility company using | |||
| Wide Area Network (WAN) links. The meter can also receive queries | Wide Area Network (WAN) links. The meter can also receive queries | |||
| from the utility company or from an advanced energy control system | from the utility company or from an advanced energy control system | |||
| controlled by the user, which may also be connected to the Fixed Part | controlled by the user, which may also be connected to the Fixed Part | |||
| via DECT-ULE. | via DECT-ULE. | |||
| A.3. Use case of MS/TP: Management of District Heating | A.3. Use case of MS/TP: Building Automation Networks | |||
| The key feature of MS/TP is it's ability to run on the same cabling | The primary use case for IPv6 over MS/TP (6LoBAC) is in building | |||
| as BACnet and some use of ModBus, the defacto standard for low | automation networks. [BACnet] is the open international standard | |||
| bandwith industry communication. Specially Modbus has been around | protocol for building automation, and MS/TP is defined in [BACnet] | |||
| since the 1980 and is still the standard for talking to fans, heat | Clause 9. MS/TP was designed to be a low cost multi-drop field bus | |||
| pumps, water purifying equipment and everything else delivering | to inter-connect the most numerous elements (sensors and actuators) | |||
| electricity, clean water and ventilation. | of a building automation network to their controllers. A key aspect | |||
| of 6LoBAC is that it is designed to co-exist with BACnet MS/TP on the | ||||
| same link, easing the ultimate transition of some BACnet networks to | ||||
| native end-to-end IPv6 transport protocols. New applications for | ||||
| 6LoBAC may be found in other domains where low cost, long distance, | ||||
| and low latency are required. | ||||
| Example: Use of MS/TP for management of district heating | Example: Use of 6LoBAC in Building Automation Networks | |||
| The mechanical room in the cellar of an apartment building gets | ||||
| district heating and electricity from the utility providers. The | The majority of installations for MS/TP are for "terminal" or | |||
| room has a Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) computer | "unitary" controllers, i.e. single zone or room controllers that may | |||
| talking to a centralized server and command center somewhere else | connect to HVAC or other controls such as lighting or blinds. The | |||
| over IP, on the other hand it is controlling the heating, fans and | economics of daisy-chaining a single twisted-pair between multiple | |||
| distribution panel over a 2-wire RS-485 based protocol to make sure | devices is often preferred over home-run Cat-5 style wiring. | |||
| the logic controller for district heating keeps a constant | ||||
| temperature at the tapwater, the logic controller for heat produktion | A multi-zone controller might be implemented as an IP router between | |||
| keeps the right radiator temperature depending on the weather and the | a traditional Ethernet link and several 6LoBAC links, fanning out to | |||
| fans have a correct speed and are switched off in case district | multiple terminal controllers. | |||
| heating fails to prevent cooling out the building and give certain | ||||
| commands in case smoke is detected. Speed is not important, in this | The superior distance capabilities of MS/TP (~1 km) compared to other | |||
| usecase, 19,200 bit/s capable equipment is sold as high speed | 6lo media may suggest its use in applications to connect remote | |||
| communication capable. Reliability is important, this not working | devices to the nearest building infrastructure. for example, remote | |||
| will easily give millions of dollars of damage. Normally the setup | pumping or measuring stations with moderate bandwidth requirements | |||
| is that the SCADA device asks a question to a specific controlling | can benefit from the low cost and robust capabilities of MS/TP over | |||
| device, gets an answer from the controlling device, asks a new | other wired technologies such as DSL, and without the line-of-site | |||
| question to some other device. | restrictions or hop-by-hop latency of many low cost wireless | |||
| solutions. | ||||
| A.4. Use case of NFC: Alternative Secure Transfer | A.4. Use case of NFC: Alternative Secure Transfer | |||
| According to applications, various secured data can be handled and | According to applications, various secured data can be handled and | |||
| transferred. Depending on security level of the data, methods for | transferred. Depending on security level of the data, methods for | |||
| transfer can be alternatively selected. | transfer can be alternatively selected. | |||
| Example: Use of NFC for Secure Transfer in Healthcare Services with | Example: Use of NFC for Secure Transfer in Healthcare Services with | |||
| Tele-Assistance | Tele-Assistance | |||
| skipping to change at page 25, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 28, line 36 ¶ | |||
| information. In such scenarios, point-to-point traffic flows are | information. In such scenarios, point-to-point traffic flows are | |||
| significant to exchange the controlled information in between sensors | significant to exchange the controlled information in between sensors | |||
| and actuators within the constrained networks. | and actuators within the constrained networks. | |||
| Example: Use of IEEE 802.15.4e for P2P communication in closed-loop | Example: Use of IEEE 802.15.4e for P2P communication in closed-loop | |||
| application | application | |||
| AODV-RPL [I-D.ietf-roll-aodv-rpl] is proposed as a standard P2P | AODV-RPL [I-D.ietf-roll-aodv-rpl] is proposed as a standard P2P | |||
| routing protocol to provide the hop-by-hop data transmission in | routing protocol to provide the hop-by-hop data transmission in | |||
| closed-loop constrained networks. Scheduling Functions i.e. SF0 | closed-loop constrained networks. Scheduling Functions i.e. SF0 | |||
| [I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-sf0] and SF1 [I-D.satish-6tisch-6top-sf1] is | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-6top-sfx] and SF1 [I-D.satish-6tisch-6top-sf1] is | |||
| proposed to provide distributed neighbor-to-neighbor and end-to-end | proposed to provide distributed neighbor-to-neighbor and end-to-end | |||
| resource reservations, respectively for traffic flows in | resource reservations, respectively for traffic flows in | |||
| deterministic networks (6TiSCH). | deterministic networks (6TiSCH). | |||
| The potential scenarios that can make use of the end-to-end resource | The potential scenarios that can make use of the end-to-end resource | |||
| reservations can be in health-care and industrial applications. | reservations can be in health-care and industrial applications. | |||
| AODV-RPL and SF0/SF1 are the significant routing and resource | AODV-RPL and SF0/SF1 are the significant routing and resource | |||
| reservation protocols for closed-loop applications in constrained | reservation protocols for closed-loop applications in constrained | |||
| networks. | networks. | |||
| End of changes. 57 change blocks. | ||||
| 170 lines changed or deleted | 312 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/ | ||||