| < draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-01.txt | draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6MAN P. Thubert, Ed. | 6MAN P. Thubert, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft Cisco | Internet-Draft Cisco | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track May 13, 2014 | Intended status: Standards Track May 13, 2014 | |||
| Expires: November 14, 2014 | Expires: November 14, 2014 | |||
| The IPv6 Flow Label within a RPL domain | The IPv6 Flow Label within a RPL domain | |||
| draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-01 | draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document present how the Flow Label can be used inside a RPL | This document present how the Flow Label can be used inside a RPL | |||
| domain as a replacement to the RPL option and provides rules for the | domain as a replacement to the RPL option and provides rules for the | |||
| root to set and reset the Flow Label when forwarding between the | root to set and reset the Flow Label when forwarding between the | |||
| inside of RPL domain and the larger Internet, in both direction. | inside of RPL domain and the larger Internet, in both direction. | |||
| This new operation saves 44 bits in each frame, and an eventual IP- | This new operation saves 44 bits in each frame, and an eventual IP- | |||
| in-IP encapsulation within the RPL domain that is required for all | in-IP encapsulation within the RPL domain that is required for all | |||
| packets that reach outside of the RPL domain. | packets that reach outside of the RPL domain. | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 44 ¶ | |||
| practical, for instance rotating devices. | practical, for instance rotating devices. | |||
| In particular, IEEE802.14.5 [IEEE802154] that is chartered to specify | In particular, IEEE802.14.5 [IEEE802154] that is chartered to specify | |||
| PHY and MAC layers for radio Lowpower Lossy Networks (LLNs), defined | PHY and MAC layers for radio Lowpower Lossy Networks (LLNs), defined | |||
| the TimeSlotted Channel Hopping [I-D.ietf-6tisch-tsch] (TSCH) mode of | the TimeSlotted Channel Hopping [I-D.ietf-6tisch-tsch] (TSCH) mode of | |||
| operation as part of the IEEE802.15.4e MAC specification in order to | operation as part of the IEEE802.15.4e MAC specification in order to | |||
| address Time Sensitive applications. | address Time Sensitive applications. | |||
| The 6TISCH architecture [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] specifies the | The 6TISCH architecture [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] specifies the | |||
| operation IPv6 over TSCH wireless networks attached and synchronized | operation IPv6 over TSCH wireless networks attached and synchronized | |||
| by backbone routers. In that model, route Computation may be | by backbone routers. | |||
| achieved in a centralized fashion by a Path Computation Element | ||||
| (PCE), in a distributed fashion using the Routing Protocol for Low | With 6TiSCH, the route Computation may be achieved in a centralized | |||
| Power and Lossy Networks [RFC6550] (RPL), or in a mixed mode. The | fashion by a Path Computation Element (PCE), in a distributed fashion | |||
| Backbone Routers may typically serve as roots for the RPL domain. | using the Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks [RFC6550] | |||
| (RPL), or in a mixed mode. | ||||
| 6TiSCH was created to simplify the adoption of IETF technology by | 6TiSCH was created to simplify the adoption of IETF technology by | |||
| other Standard Defining Organizations (SDOs), in particular in the | other Standard Defining Organizations (SDOs), in particular in the | |||
| Industrial Automation space, which already relies on variations of | Industrial Automation space, which already relies on variations of | |||
| IEEE802.15.4e TSCH for Wireless Sensor Networking. ISA100.11a | IEEE802.15.4e TSCH for Wireless Sensor Networking. | |||
| [ISA100.11a] is an example of such industrial WSN standard, using | ||||
| IEEE802.15.4e over the classical IEEE802.14.5 PHY. In that case, | ISA100.11a [ISA100.11a] is an example of such industrial WSN | |||
| after security is applied, roughly 80 octets are available per frame | standard, using IEEE802.15.4e over the classical IEEE802.14.5 PHY. | |||
| for IP and Payload. In order to 1) avoid fragmentation and 2) | In that case, after security is applied, roughly 80 octets are | |||
| conserve energy, the SDO will scrutinize any bit in the frame and | available per frame for IP and Payload. In order to 1) avoid | |||
| reject any waste. | fragmentation and 2) conserve energy, the SDO will scrutinize any bit | |||
| in the frame and reject any waste. | ||||
| The challenge to obtain the adoption of IPv6 in the original standard | The challenge to obtain the adoption of IPv6 in the original standard | |||
| was really to save any possible bit in the frames, including the UDP | was really to save any possible bit in the frames, including the UDP | |||
| checksum which was an interesting discussion on its own. This work | checksum which was an interesting discussion on its own. This work | |||
| was actually one of the roots for the 6LoWPAN Header Compression | was actually one of the roots for the 6LoWPAN Header Compression | |||
| [RFC6282] work, which goes down to the individual bits to save space | [RFC6282] work, which goes down to the individual bits to save space | |||
| in the frames for actual data, and allowed ISA100.11a to adopt IPv6. | in the frames for actual data, and allowed ISA100.11a to adopt IPv6. | |||
| 1.1. On Wasted Energy | 1.1. On Wasted Energy | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 50 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 5 ¶ | |||
| A classical RPL implementation will use the RPL Option for Carrying | A classical RPL implementation will use the RPL Option for Carrying | |||
| RPL Information in Data-Plane Datagrams [RFC6553] to tag a packet | RPL Information in Data-Plane Datagrams [RFC6553] to tag a packet | |||
| with the Instance ID and other information that RPL requires for its | with the Instance ID and other information that RPL requires for its | |||
| operation within the RPL domain. In particular, the Rank, which is | operation within the RPL domain. In particular, the Rank, which is | |||
| the scalar metric computed by an specialized Objective Function such | the scalar metric computed by an specialized Objective Function such | |||
| as [RFC6552], is modified at each hop and allows to validate that the | as [RFC6552], is modified at each hop and allows to validate that the | |||
| packet progresses in the expected direction each upwards or downwards | packet progresses in the expected direction each upwards or downwards | |||
| in along the DODAG. | in along the DODAG. | |||
| With [RFC6553] the RPL option is encoded as 6 Octets; it must be | With [RFC6553], the RPL option is encoded as 6 Octets; it must be | |||
| placed in a Hop-by-Hop header that represents 2 additional octets for | placed in a Hop-by-Hop header that represents 2 additional octets for | |||
| a total of 8. In order to limit its range to the inside the RPL | a total of 8. In order to limit its range to the inside the RPL | |||
| domain, the Hop-by-Hop header must be added to (or removed from) | domain, the Hop-by-Hop header must be added to (or removed from) | |||
| packets that cross the border of the RPL domain. For reasons such as | packets that cross the border of the RPL domain. For reasons such as | |||
| the capability to send ICMP errors back to the source, this operation | the capability to send ICMP errors back to the source, this operation | |||
| involves an extra IP-in-IP encapsulation inside the RPL domain for | involves an extra IP-in-IP encapsulation inside the RPL domain for | |||
| all the packets which path is not contained within the RPL domain. | all the packets which path is not contained within the RPL domain. | |||
| The 8-octets overhead is detrimental to the LLN operation, in | The 8-octets overhead is detrimental to the LLN operation, in | |||
| particular with regards to bandwidth and battery constraints. The | particular with regards to bandwidth and battery constraints. The | |||
| End of changes. 4 change blocks. | ||||
| 14 lines changed or deleted | 16 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/ | ||||