< draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-18.txt		draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-19.txt >
	ROLL P. Thubert, Ed.		ROLL P. Thubert, Ed.
	Internet-Draft Cisco Systems		Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
	Updates: 6554 (if approved) R.A. Jadhav		Updates: 6554 (if approved) R.A. Jadhav
	Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Tech		Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Tech
	Expires: 13 January 2022 M. Gillmore		Expires: 28 January 2022 M. Gillmore
	Itron		Itron
	12 July 2021		27 July 2021
	Root initiated routing state in RPL		Root initiated routing state in RPL
	draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-18		draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-19
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document extends RFC 6550 and RFC 6553 to enable a RPL Root to		This document extends RFC 6550 and RFC 6553 to enable a RPL Root to
	install and maintain Projected Routes within its DODAG, along a		install and maintain Projected Routes within its DODAG, along a
	selected set of nodes that may or may not include self, for a chosen		selected set of nodes that may or may not include self, for a chosen
	duration. This potentially enables routes that are more optimized or		duration. This potentially enables routes that are more optimized or
	resilient than those obtained with the classical distributed		resilient than those obtained with the classical distributed
	operation of RPL, either in terms of the size of a Routing Header or		operation of RPL, either in terms of the size of a Routing Header or
	in terms of path length, which impacts both the latency and the		in terms of path length, which impacts both the latency and the
	skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶
	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 13 January 2022.		This Internet-Draft will expire on 28 January 2022.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2021 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
	license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.		license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
	skipping to change at page 26, line 6 ¶		skipping to change at page 26, line 6 ¶
	[RFC8025] to compress the RPL artifacts as indicated in [RFC8138].		[RFC8025] to compress the RPL artifacts as indicated in [RFC8138].
	In that case, the source routed header is the exact copy of the		In that case, the source routed header is the exact copy of the
	(chain of) SRH-6LoRH found in the SR-VIO, also terminating by the		(chain of) SRH-6LoRH found in the SR-VIO, also terminating by the
	Track Egress. The RPI-6LoRH is appended next, followed by an IP-		Track Egress. The RPI-6LoRH is appended next, followed by an IP-
	in-IP 6LoRH Header that indicates the Ingress Router in the		in-IP 6LoRH Header that indicates the Ingress Router in the
	Encapsulator Address field, see as a similar case Figure 20 of		Encapsulator Address field, see as a similar case Figure 20 of
	[TURN-ON_RFC8138].		[TURN-ON_RFC8138].
	In the case of a loose source-routed path, there MUST be either a		In the case of a loose source-routed path, there MUST be either a
	neighbor that is adjacent to the loose next hop, on which case the		segment for the same Track to the loose next hop, on which case the
	packet is forwarded to that neighbor, or another Track to the loose		packet is forwarded to the next hop along that segment, a common
	next hop for which this node is Ingress; in the latter case, another		neighbor with the loose next hop, on which case the packet is
	encapsulation takes place and the process possibly recurses;		forwarded to that neighbor, or another Track to the loose next hop
			for which this node or a neighbor is Ingress. In the latter case,
			another encapsulation takes place and the process possibly recurses;
	otherwise the packet is dropped.		otherwise the packet is dropped.
	In case of a forwarding error along a Source Route path, the node		In case of a forwarding error along a Source Route path, the node
	that fails to forward SHOULD send an ICMP error with a code "Error in		that fails to forward SHOULD send an ICMP error with a code "Error in
	Source Routing Header" back to the source of the packet, as described		Source Routing Header" back to the source of the packet, as described
	in section 11.2.2.3. of [RPL]. Upon this message, the encapsulating		in section 11.2.2.3. of [RPL]. Upon this message, the encapsulating
	node SHOULD stop using the source route path for a period of time and		node SHOULD stop using the source route path for a period of time and
	it SHOULD send an ICMP message with a Code "Error in Projected Route"		it SHOULD send an ICMP message with a Code "Error in Projected Route"
	to the Root. Failure to follow these steps may result in packet loss		to the Root. Failure to follow these steps may result in packet loss
	and wasted resources along the source route path that is broken.		and wasted resources along the source route path that is broken.
	skipping to change at page 48, line 28 ¶		skipping to change at page 48, line 28 ¶
	(RPLs)", RFC 7416, DOI 10.17487/RFC7416, January 2015,		(RPLs)", RFC 7416, DOI 10.17487/RFC7416, January 2015,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7416>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7416>.
	[6TiSCH-ARCHI]		[6TiSCH-ARCHI]
	Thubert, P., Ed., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the Time-		Thubert, P., Ed., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the Time-
	Slotted Channel Hopping Mode of IEEE 802.15.4 (6TiSCH)",		Slotted Channel Hopping Mode of IEEE 802.15.4 (6TiSCH)",
	RFC 9030, DOI 10.17487/RFC9030, May 2021,		RFC 9030, DOI 10.17487/RFC9030, May 2021,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9030>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9030>.
	[RAW-ARCHI]		[RAW-ARCHI]
	Thubert, P., Papadopoulos, G. Z., and R. Buddenberg,		Thubert, P., Papadopoulos, G. Z., and L. Berger, "Reliable
	"Reliable and Available Wireless Architecture/Framework",		and Available Wireless Architecture/Framework", Work in
	Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-pthubert-raw-		Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-raw-architecture-00,
	architecture-05, 15 November 2020,		12 July 2021, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
	<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-pthubert-raw-		draft-ietf-raw-architecture-00>.
	architecture-05>.
	[TURN-ON_RFC8138]		[TURN-ON_RFC8138]
	Thubert, P., Ed. and L. Zhao, "A Routing Protocol for Low-		Thubert, P., Ed. and L. Zhao, "A Routing Protocol for Low-
	Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) Destination-Oriented		Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) Destination-Oriented
	Directed Acyclic Graph (DODAG) Configuration Option for		Directed Acyclic Graph (DODAG) Configuration Option for
	the 6LoWPAN Routing Header", RFC 9035,		the 6LoWPAN Routing Header", RFC 9035,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC9035, April 2021,		DOI 10.17487/RFC9035, April 2021,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9035>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9035>.
	[RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,		[RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
End of changes. 6 change blocks.
	14 lines changed or deleted		15 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/