< draft-ietf-roll-useofrplinfo-03.txt		draft-ietf-roll-useofrplinfo-04.txt >
	ROLL Working Group M. Robles		ROLL Working Group M. Robles
	Internet-Draft Ericsson		Internet-Draft Ericsson
	Intended status: Informational M. Richardson		Intended status: Informational M. Richardson
	Expires: October 6, 2016 SSW		Expires: October 7, 2016 SSW
	P. Thubert		P. Thubert
	Cisco		Cisco
	April 4, 2016		April 5, 2016
	When to use RFC 6553, 6554 and IPv6-in-IPv6		When to use RFC 6553, 6554 and IPv6-in-IPv6
	draft-ietf-roll-useofrplinfo-03		draft-ietf-roll-useofrplinfo-04
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document looks at different data flows through LLN networks		This document looks at different data flows through LLN networks
	where RPL is used to establish routing. The document enumerates the		where RPL is used to establish routing. The document enumerates the
	cases where RFC 6553, RFC 6554 and IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation is		cases where RFC 6553, RFC 6554 and IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation is
	required. This analysis provides the basis on which to design		required. This analysis provides the basis on which to design
	efficient compression of these headers.		efficient compression of these headers.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	skipping to change at page 1, line 37 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 37 ¶
	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 October 6, 2016.		This Internet-Draft will expire on October 7, 2016.
	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 16 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 16 ¶
	described in the Simplified BSD License.		described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	2. Terminology and Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Terminology and Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. Sample/reference topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3. Sample/reference topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4. Use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		4. Use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	5. Storing mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		5. Storing mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	5.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . . . 9		5.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . . . 9
	5.2. Example of Flow from root to RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . . . 10		5.2. Example of Flow from root to RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . . . 9
	5.3. Example of Flow from root to not-RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . 10		5.3. Example of Flow from root to not-RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . 10
	5.4. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . 11		5.4. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . 11
	5.5. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to Internet . . . . . 12		5.5. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to Internet . . . . . 11
	5.6. Example of Flow from Internet to RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . 12		5.6. Example of Flow from Internet to RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . 12
	5.7. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to Internet . . . 13		5.7. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to Internet . . . 12
	5.8. Example of Flow from Internet to non-RPL-aware-leaf . . . 14		5.8. Example of Flow from Internet to non-RPL-aware-leaf . . . 13
	5.9. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to RPL-aware-leaf . . 14		5.9. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to RPL-aware-leaf . . 14
	5.10. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to non-RPL-aware-leaf 15		5.10. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to non-RPL-aware-leaf 15
	5.11. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to RPL-aware-leaf 17		5.11. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to RPL-aware-leaf 17
	5.12. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to not-RPL-aware-		5.12. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to not-RPL-aware-
	leaf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		leaf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	6. Non Storing mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		6. Non Storing mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	6.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . . . 19		6.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . . . 19
	6.2. Example of Flow from root to RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . . . 20		6.2. Example of Flow from root to RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . . . 20
	6.3. Example of Flow from root to not-RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . 20		6.3. Example of Flow from root to not-RPL-aware-leaf . . . . . 20
	6.4. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . 21		6.4. Example of Flow from not-RPL-aware-leaf to root . . . . . 21
	skipping to change at page 9, line 5 ¶		skipping to change at page 8, line 33 ¶
	5. Storing mode		5. Storing mode
	This table summarizes what headers are needed in the following		This table summarizes what headers are needed in the following
	scenarios, and indicates the IPIP header must be inserted on a hop-		scenarios, and indicates the IPIP header must be inserted on a hop-
	by-hop basis, and when it can target the destination node directly.		by-hop basis, and when it can target the destination node directly.
	There are three possible situations: hop-by-hop necessary (indicated		There are three possible situations: hop-by-hop necessary (indicated
	by "hop"), or destination address possible (indicated by "dst"). In		by "hop"), or destination address possible (indicated by "dst"). In
	all cases hop by hop can be used. In cases where no IPIP header is		all cases hop by hop can be used. In cases where no IPIP header is
	needed, the column is left blank.		needed, the column is left blank.
	+---------------+--------------+--------------+----------+----------+		+--------------+-------+-------+-----------+-----------+
	| Use Case | RPI (RFC | RH3 (RFC | IP-in-IP | IPIP dst |		| Use Case | RPI | RH3 | IP-in-IP | IPIP dst |
	| | 6553) | 6554) | | |		+--------------+-------+-------+-----------+-----------+
	+---------------+--------------+--------------+----------+----------+		| Raf to root | Yes | No | No | -- |
	| Raf to root | Yes | No | No | -- |		| root to Raf | Yes | No | No | -- |
	| root to Raf | Yes | No | No | -- |		| root to ~Raf | Yes | No | Yes | hop |
	| root to ~Raf | Yes | No | Yes | hop |		| ~Raf to root | Yes | No | Yes | root |
	| ~Raf to root | Yes | No | Yes | root |		| Raf to Int | Yes | No | Yes | root |
	| Raf to | Yes | No | Yes | root |		| Int to Raf | Yes | No | Yes | raf |
	| Internet | | | | |		| ~Raf to Int | Yes | No | Yes | root |
	| Internet to | Yes | No | Yes | raf |		| Int to ~Raf | Yes | No | Yes | hop |
	| Raf | | | | |		| Raf to Raf | Yes | No | No | -- |
	| ~Raf to | Yes | No | Yes | root |		| Raf to ~Raf | Yes | No | Yes | hop |
	| Internet | | | | |		| ~Raf to Raf | Yes | No | Yes | dst |
	| Internet to | Yes | No | Yes | hop |		| ~Raf to ~Raf | Yes | No | Yes | hop |
	| ~Raf | | | | |		+--------------+-------+-------+-----------+-----------+
	| Raf to Raf | Yes | No | No | -- |
	| Raf to ~Raf | Yes | No | Yes | hop |
	| ~Raf to Raf | Yes | No | Yes | dst |
	| ~Raf to ~Raf | Yes | No | Yes | hop |
	+---------------+--------------+--------------+----------+----------+
	Table 1: Headers needed in Storing mode: RPI, RH3, IP-in-IP		Table 1: Headers needed in Storing mode: RPI, RH3, IP-in-IP
	encapsulation		encapsulation
	5.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root		5.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root
	As states in Section 16.2 of [RFC6550] a RPL-aware-leaf node does		As states in Section 16.2 of [RFC6550] a RPL-aware-leaf node does
	not generally issue DIO messages; a leaf node accepts DIO messages		not generally issue DIO messages; a leaf node accepts DIO messages
	from upstream. (When the inconsistency in routing occurs, a leaf		from upstream. (When the inconsistency in routing occurs, a leaf
	node will generate a DIO with an infinite rank, to fix it). It may		node will generate a DIO with an infinite rank, to fix it). It may
	skipping to change at page 19, line 27 ¶		skipping to change at page 19, line 27 ¶
	| headers | | | | | |		| headers | | | | | |
	| Untouched | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |		| Untouched | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
	| headers | | | | | |		| headers | | | | | |
	+-------------+--------+-----------+-----------+-----------+--------+		+-------------+--------+-----------+-----------+-----------+--------+
	Storing: Summary of the use of headers from not-RPL-aware-leaf to		Storing: Summary of the use of headers from not-RPL-aware-leaf to
	not-RPL-aware-leaf		not-RPL-aware-leaf
	6. Non Storing mode		6. Non Storing mode
	+------------------+------+------+-------+-----------+		+--------------+------+------+-------+-----------+
	| Use Case | RPI | RH3 | IPIP | IPIP dst |		| Use Case | RPI | RH3 | IPIP | IPIP dst |
	+------------------+------+------+-------+-----------+		+--------------+------+------+-------+-----------+
	| Raf to root | Yes | No | No | -- |		| Raf to root | Yes | No | No | -- |
	| root to Raf | Yes | Yes | No | -- |		| root to Raf | Yes | Yes | No | -- |
	| root to ~Raf | No | Yes | Yes | -- |		| root to ~Raf | No | Yes | Yes | 6LR |
	| ~Raf to root | Yes | No | Yes | root |		| ~Raf to root | Yes | No | Yes | root |
	| Raf to Internet | Yes | No | Yes | root |		| Raf to Int | Yes | No | Yes | root |
	| Internet to Raf | opt | Yes | Yes | dst |		| Int to Raf | opt | Yes | Yes | dst |
	| ~Raf to Internet | Yes | No | Yes | root |		| ~Raf to Int | Yes | No | Yes | root |
	| Internet to ~Raf | opt | Yes | Yes | 6LR |		| Int to ~Raf | opt | Yes | Yes | 6LR |
	| Raf to Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/dst |		| Raf to Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/dst |
	| Raf to ~Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/6LN |		| Raf to ~Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/6LR |
	| ~Raf to Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/6LN |		| ~Raf to Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/6LN |
	| ~Raf to ~Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/6LN |		| ~Raf to ~Raf | Yes | Yes | Yes | root/6LR |
	+------------------+------+------+-------+-----------+		+--------------+------+------+-------+-----------+
	Table 2: Headers needed in Non-Storing mode: RPI, RH3, IP-in-IP		Table 2: Headers needed in Non-Storing mode: RPI, RH3, IP-in-IP
	encapsulation		encapsulation
	6.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root		6.1. Example of Flow from RPL-aware-leaf to root
	In non-storing mode the leaf node uses default routing to send		In non-storing mode the leaf node uses default routing to send
	traffic to the root. The RPI header must be included to avoid/detect		traffic to the root. The RPI header must be included to avoid/detect
	loops.		loops.
End of changes. 9 change blocks.
	45 lines changed or deleted		40 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/