| < draft-thubert-6man-ipv6-over-wireless-08.txt | draft-thubert-6man-ipv6-over-wireless-09.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6MAN P. Thubert, Ed. | 6MAN P. Thubert, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft Cisco Systems | Internet-Draft Cisco Systems | |||
| Intended status: Informational 24 November 2020 | Intended status: Informational 17 May 2021 | |||
| Expires: 28 May 2021 | Expires: 18 November 2021 | |||
| IPv6 Neighbor Discovery on Wireless Networks | IPv6 Neighbor Discovery on Wireless Networks | |||
| draft-thubert-6man-ipv6-over-wireless-08 | draft-thubert-6man-ipv6-over-wireless-09 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes how the original IPv6 Neighbor Discovery and | This document describes how the original IPv6 Neighbor Discovery and | |||
| Wireless ND (WiND) can be applied on various abstractions of wireless | Wireless ND (WiND) can be applied on various abstractions of wireless | |||
| media. | media. | |||
| 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 32 ¶ | |||
| 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 28 May 2021. | This Internet-Draft will expire on 18 November 2021. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2020 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. | |||
| Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | |||
| and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | |||
| extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text | extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text | |||
| as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | |||
| provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
| 2. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 3. ND-Classic, Wireless ND and ND-Proxies . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.1. IP Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 4. IP Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.2. IP Subnets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 4.1. Physical Broadcast Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2.3. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 4.2. Link Layer Broadcast Emulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 3. ND-Classic, Wireless ND and ND-Proxies . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 4.3. Mapping the IPv6 link Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 4. IP Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 4.4. Mapping the IPv6 subnet Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 4.1. Physical Broadcast Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 5. Wireless Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 4.2. link-layer Broadcast Emulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 5.1. Introduction to Wireless ND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 4.3. Mapping the IPv6 link Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 5.2. links and Link-Local Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 4.4. Mapping the IPv6 subnet Abstraction . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 5.3. subnets and Global Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 5. Wireless Neighbor Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 6. WiND Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 5.1. Introduction to Wireless ND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 6.1. Case of LPWANs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 5.2. links and Link-Local Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 6.2. Case of Infrastructure BSS and ESS . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 5.3. subnets and Global Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 6.3. Case of Mesh Under Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 6. WiND Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 6.4. Case of DMB radios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 6.1. Case of LPWANs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6.4.1. Using ND-Classic only . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 6.2. Case of Infrastructure BSS and ESS . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6.4.2. Using Wireless ND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 6.3. Case of Mesh Under Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 6.4. Case of DMB radios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 6.4.1. Using ND-Classic only . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 6.4.2. Using Wireless ND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 11. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | ||||
| 11. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | ||||
| Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | ||||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| [IEEE Std. 802.1] Ethernet Bridging provides an efficient and | IEEE Std. 802.1 [IEEE Std. 802.1] Ethernet Bridging provides an | |||
| reliable broadcast service for wired networks; applications and | efficient and reliable broadcast service for wired networks; | |||
| protocols have been built that heavily depend on that feature for | applications and protocols have been built that heavily depend on | |||
| their core operation. Unfortunately, Low-Power Lossy Networks (LLNs) | that feature for their core operation. Unfortunately, Low-Power | |||
| and Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs) generally do not benefit | Lossy Networks (LLNs) and Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs) | |||
| from the same reliable and cheap broadcast capabilities as Ethernet | generally do not benefit from the same reliable and cheap broadcast | |||
| links. | capabilities as Ethernet links. | |||
| As opposed to unicast transmissions, the broadcast transmissions over | As opposed to unicast transmissions, the broadcast transmissions over | |||
| wireless links are not subject to automatic retries (ARQ) and can be | wireless links are not subject to automatic retries (ARQ) and can be | |||
| very unreliable. Reducing the speed at the physical (PHY) layer for | very unreliable. Reducing the speed at the physical (PHY) layer for | |||
| broadcast transmissions can increase the reliability, at the expense | broadcast transmissions can increase the reliability, at the expense | |||
| of a higher relative cost of broadcast on the overall available | of a higher relative cost of broadcast on the overall available | |||
| bandwidth. As a result, protocols designed for bridged networks that | bandwidth. As a result, protocols designed for bridged networks that | |||
| rely on broadcast transmissions often exhibit disappointing | rely on broadcast transmissions often exhibit disappointing | |||
| behaviours when employed unmodified on a local wireless medium (see | behaviours when employed unmodified on a local wireless medium (see | |||
| [MCAST PROBLEMS]). | [MCAST PROBLEMS]). | |||
| Like Transparent Bridging, the IPv6 [RFC8200] Neighbor Discovery | Like Transparent Bridging, the IPv6 [RFC8200] Neighbor Discovery | |||
| [RFC4861] [RFC4862] Protocol (ND-Classic) is reactive, and relies on | [RFC4861] [RFC4862] Protocol (ND-Classic) is reactive, and relies on | |||
| on-demand Network Layer multicast to locate an on-link correspondent | on-demand Network Layer multicast to locate an on-link correspondent | |||
| (Address Resolution, AR) and ensure the uniqueness of an IPv6 address | (Address Resolution, AR) and ensure the uniqueness of an IPv6 address | |||
| (Duplicate Address Detection, DAD). On Ethernet LANs and most WLANs | (Duplicate Address Detection, DAD). On Ethernet LANs and most WLANs | |||
| and Low-Power Personal Area Networks (LoWPANs), the Network Layer | and Low-Power Personal Area Networks (LoWPANs), the Network Layer | |||
| multicast operation is typically implemented as a Link Layer | multicast operation is typically implemented as a link-layer | |||
| broadcast for the lack of an adapted and scalable Link Layer | broadcast for the lack of an adapted and scalable link-layer | |||
| multicast operation. | multicast operation. | |||
| It results that on wireless, an ND-Classic multicast message is | It results that on wireless, an ND-Classic multicast message is | |||
| typically broadcasted. So even though there are very few nodes | typically broadcasted. So even though there are very few nodes | |||
| subscribed to the Network Layer multicast group, and there is at most | subscribed to the Network Layer multicast group, and there is at most | |||
| one intended Target, the broadcast is received by many wireless nodes | one intended Target, the broadcast is received by many wireless nodes | |||
| over the whole subnet (e.g., the ESS fabric). And yet, the broadcast | over the whole subnet (e.g., the ESS fabric). And yet, the broadcast | |||
| transmission being unreliable, the intended Target may effectively | transmission being unreliable, the intended Target may effectively | |||
| have missed the packet. | have missed the packet. | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 12 ¶ | |||
| ignore a ratio of the broadcasts, making ND-Classic operations even | ignore a ratio of the broadcasts, making ND-Classic operations even | |||
| less reliable. | less reliable. | |||
| Wi-Fi [IEEE Std. 802.11] Access Points (APs) deployed in an Extended | Wi-Fi [IEEE Std. 802.11] Access Points (APs) deployed in an Extended | |||
| Service Set (ESS) act as [IEEE Std. 802.1] bridges between the | Service Set (ESS) act as [IEEE Std. 802.1] bridges between the | |||
| wireless stations (STA) and the wired backbone. As opposed to the | wireless stations (STA) and the wired backbone. As opposed to the | |||
| classical Transparent (aka Learning) Bridge operation that installs | classical Transparent (aka Learning) Bridge operation that installs | |||
| the forwarding state reactively to traffic, the bridging state in the | the forwarding state reactively to traffic, the bridging state in the | |||
| AP is established proactively, at the time of association. This | AP is established proactively, at the time of association. This | |||
| protects the wireless medium against broadcast-intensive Transparent | protects the wireless medium against broadcast-intensive Transparent | |||
| Bridging lookups. The association process registers the Link Layer | Bridging lookups. The association process registers the link-layer | |||
| (MAC) Address (LLA) of the STA to the AP proactively, i.e., before it | (MAC) Address (LLA) of the STA to the AP proactively, i.e., before it | |||
| is needed. The AP maintains the list of the associated addresses and | is needed. The AP maintains the list of the associated addresses and | |||
| blocks the lookups for destinations that are not registered. This | blocks the lookups for destinations that are not registered. This | |||
| solves the broadcast issue for the Link Layer lookups, but the | solves the broadcast issue for the link-layer lookups, but the | |||
| Network Layer problem remains. | Network Layer problem remains. | |||
| Though ND-Classic was the state of the art when designed for an | Though ND-Classic was the state of the art when designed for an | |||
| Ethernet wire at the end of the twentieth century, it must be | Ethernet wire at the end of the twentieth century, it must be | |||
| reevaluated for the new technologies, such as wireless and overlays, | reevaluated for the new technologies, such as wireless and overlays, | |||
| that evolved since then. This document discusses the applicability | that evolved since then. This document discusses the applicability | |||
| of ND-Classic over wireless links, as compared with routing-based | of ND-Classic over wireless links, as compared with routing-based | |||
| alternatives such as prefix-per node and multi-link subnets (MLSN), | alternatives such as prefix-per node and multi-link subnets (MLSN), | |||
| and with Wireless ND (WiND), that is similar to the Wi-Fi association | and with Wireless ND (WiND), that is similar to the Wi-Fi association | |||
| and reduces the need for Network Layer multicast. | and reduces the need for Network Layer multicast. | |||
| 2. Acronyms | 2. Terminology | |||
| 2.1. IP Links | ||||
| For a long time, the term link has been used to refer to the layer 2 | ||||
| communication medium that can be leveraged at layer 3 to instantiate | ||||
| one IP hop. In this document we conserve that term but differentiate | ||||
| it from an IP link, which is a layer 3 abstraction that represents | ||||
| the layer 2 link but is not the layer 2 link, like the map is not the | ||||
| country. | ||||
| With IPv6, IP has moved to layer 3 abstractions for its operations, | ||||
| e.g., with the use of link local address (LLA), and that of IP | ||||
| multicast for link-scoped operations. At the same time, the concept | ||||
| of an IP link emerged as an abstraction that represents how the IPv6 | ||||
| considers the layer 2 link: | ||||
| * An IP link connects an IP node to one or more other IP nodes using | ||||
| a lower layer network. The lower layer network may comprise | ||||
| multiple lower layer links, e.g., in the case of a switched fabric | ||||
| or a mesh-under LLN. | ||||
| * an IP link defines the scope of an LLA, and defines the domain in | ||||
| which the LLA must be unique | ||||
| * an IP link provides a subset of the connectivity that is offered | ||||
| by the lower layer; if the IP link is narrower than the layer 2 | ||||
| reachable domain, then layer 3 filters must restrict the link- | ||||
| scoped communication to remain between peers on a same IP link, | ||||
| and more than one IP link may be installed on the same physical | ||||
| interface to connect to different peers. | ||||
| * an IP link can be Point to Point (P2P), Point to Point (P2MP, | ||||
| forming a partial mesh), NBMA (non-broadcast multi-access, fully | ||||
| meshed), or transit (broadcast-capable and any-to-any). | ||||
| It is a network design decision to use one IP link model or another | ||||
| over a given lower layer network, e.g., to map a Frame Relay network | ||||
| as a P2MP IP link, or as a collection of P2P IP links. As another | ||||
| example, an Ethernet fabric may be bridged, in which case the nodes | ||||
| that interconnect the layer 2 links are L2 switches, and the fabric | ||||
| can be abstracted as a single transit IP link; or the fabric can be | ||||
| routed, in which case the P2P IP links are congruent with the layer 2 | ||||
| links, and the nodes that interconnect the links are routers. | ||||
| 2.2. IP Subnets | ||||
| IPv6 builds another abstraction, the subnet, over one shared or over | ||||
| multiple IP links, forming a MLSN in the latter case. An MLSN is | ||||
| formed over IP links (e.g., P2P or P2MP) that are interconnected by | ||||
| routers that either inject hosts routes in an IGP, in which case the | ||||
| topology can be anything, or perform ND proxy operations, in which | ||||
| case the structure of links must be strictly hierarchical to avoid | ||||
| loops. | ||||
| [RFC8929] defines bridging and routing IPv6 ND proxies. Both forms | ||||
| of ND proxies interconnect IP links and enable to isolate the layer 2 | ||||
| broadcast domains. But in the case of a bridging proxy, the layer 2 | ||||
| unicast communication can still exist between the layer 2 domains | ||||
| that are coverered by the layer 3 links, whereas in the base of a | ||||
| routing proxy, they are isolated and packets must be routed back and | ||||
| forth. Bridging proxies are possible between compatible technologies | ||||
| and translational bridges (e.g., Wi-Fi to Ethernet), whereas routing | ||||
| proxies are required between non-bridgeable technologies and | ||||
| desirable to avoid exposing the layer 2 addresses across, e.g., for | ||||
| reasons of stability and scalability. | ||||
| It is another network design decision to use one IP subnet model or | ||||
| another over a given lower layer network. A switched fabric can host | ||||
| one or more IP subnets, in which case the IP links can reach all and | ||||
| beyond one subnet. On the other hand, a subnet can encompass a | ||||
| collection of links; in that case, the scope of the link local | ||||
| addresses, which is the IP Link, is narrower than that of the subnet. | ||||
| The switched and routed fabric above could be the exact same network | ||||
| of physical links and boxes, what changes is the way the networking | ||||
| abstractions are mapped onto the system, and the implication of such | ||||
| decision include the capability to reach another node at layer-2, and | ||||
| the size of the broadcast domain and related broadcast storms. | ||||
| 2.3. Acronyms | ||||
| This document uses the following abbreviations: | This document uses the following abbreviations: | |||
| 6BBR: 6LoWPAN Backbone Router | 6BBR: 6LoWPAN Backbone Router | |||
| 6LN: 6LoWPAN Node | 6LN: 6LoWPAN Node | |||
| 6LR: 6LoWPAN Router | 6LR: 6LoWPAN Router | |||
| ARO: Address Registration Option | ARO: Address Registration Option | |||
| DAC: Duplicate Address Confirmation | DAC: Duplicate Address Confirmation | |||
| DAD: Duplicate Address Detection | DAD: Duplicate Address Detection | |||
| DAR: Duplicate Address Request | DAR: Duplicate Address Request | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 31 ¶ | |||
| ND protocol to operate as expected. | ND protocol to operate as expected. | |||
| This problem can be alleviated by reducing the size of the broadcast | This problem can be alleviated by reducing the size of the broadcast | |||
| domain that encompasses wireless access links. This has been done in | domain that encompasses wireless access links. This has been done in | |||
| the art of IP subnetting by partitioning the subnets and by routing | the art of IP subnetting by partitioning the subnets and by routing | |||
| between them, at the extreme by assigning a /64 prefix to each | between them, at the extreme by assigning a /64 prefix to each | |||
| wireless node (see [RFC8273]). | wireless node (see [RFC8273]). | |||
| Another way to split the broadcast domain within a subnet is to proxy | Another way to split the broadcast domain within a subnet is to proxy | |||
| at the boundary of the wired and wireless domains the Network Layer | at the boundary of the wired and wireless domains the Network Layer | |||
| protocols that rely on Link Layer broadcast operations. [IEEE Std. | protocols that rely on link-layer broadcast operations. [IEEE Std. | |||
| 802.11] recommends to deploy proxies for the IPv4 Address Resolution | 802.11] recommends to deploy proxies for the IPv4 Address Resolution | |||
| Protocol (ARP) and IPv6 ND at the APs. This requires the exhaustive | Protocol (ARP) and IPv6 ND at the APs. This requires the exhaustive | |||
| list of the IP addresses for which proxying is provided. Forming and | list of the IP addresses for which proxying is provided. Forming and | |||
| maintaining that knowledge a hard problem in the general case of | maintaining that knowledge a hard problem in the general case of | |||
| radio connectivity, which keeps changing with movements and | radio connectivity, which keeps changing with movements and | |||
| variations in the environment that alter the range of transmissions. | variations in the environment that alter the range of transmissions. | |||
| [SAVI] suggests to discover the addresses by snooping the ND-Classic | [SAVI] suggests to discover the addresses by snooping the ND-Classic | |||
| protocol, but that can also be unreliable. An IPv6 address may not | protocol, but that can also be unreliable. An IPv6 address may not | |||
| be discovered immediately due to a packet loss. It may never be | be discovered immediately due to a packet loss. It may never be | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 4 ¶ | |||
| one of its addresses, e.g., a printer that waits in wake-on-lan | one of its addresses, e.g., a printer that waits in wake-on-lan | |||
| state. A change of anchor, e.g. due to a movement, may be missed or | state. A change of anchor, e.g. due to a movement, may be missed or | |||
| misordered, leading to unreliable connectivity and an incomplete list | misordered, leading to unreliable connectivity and an incomplete list | |||
| of addresses. | of addresses. | |||
| Wireless ND (WiND) introduces a new approach to IPv6 Neighbor | Wireless ND (WiND) introduces a new approach to IPv6 Neighbor | |||
| Discovery that is designed to apply to the WLANs and LoWPANs types of | Discovery that is designed to apply to the WLANs and LoWPANs types of | |||
| networks, as well as other Non-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA) networks | networks, as well as other Non-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA) networks | |||
| such as Data-Center overlays. WiND applies routing inside the | such as Data-Center overlays. WiND applies routing inside the | |||
| subnets, which enables to form potentially large MLSNs without | subnets, which enables to form potentially large MLSNs without | |||
| creating a large broadcast domain at the Link Layer. In a fashion | creating a large broadcast domain at the link-layer. In a fashion | |||
| similar to a Wi-Fi Association, IPv6 Hosts register their addresses | similar to a Wi-Fi Association, IPv6 Hosts register their addresses | |||
| to their serving router(s), using [RFC8505]. With the registration, | to their serving router(s), using [RFC8505]. With the registration, | |||
| the routers have a complete knowledge of the hosts they serve and in | the routers have a complete knowledge of the hosts they serve and in | |||
| return, hosts obtain routing services for their registered addresses. | return, hosts obtain routing services for their registered addresses. | |||
| The registration is abstract to the routing service, and it can be | The registration is abstract to the routing service, and it can be | |||
| protected to prevent impersonation attacks with [RFC8928]. | protected to prevent impersonation attacks with [RFC8928]. | |||
| The routing service can be a simple reflexion in a Hub-and-Spoke | The routing service can be a simple reflexion in a Hub-and-Spoke | |||
| subnet that emulates an IEEE Std. 802.11 Infrastructure BSS at the | subnet that emulates an IEEE Std. 802.11 Infrastructure BSS at the | |||
| Network Layer. It can also be a full-fledge routing protocol, in | Network Layer. It can also be a full-fledge routing protocol, in | |||
| particular RPL [RFC6550], which is designed to adapt to various LLNs | particular RPL [RFC6550], which is designed to adapt to various LLNs | |||
| such as WLAN and WPAN radio meshes. Finally, the routing service can | such as WLAN and WPAN radio meshes. Finally, the routing service can | |||
| also be an ND proxy that emulates an IEEE Std. 802.11 Infrastructure | also be an ND proxy that emulates an IEEE Std. 802.11 Infrastructure | |||
| ESS at the Network Layer, as specified in the IPv6 Backbone Router | ESS at the Network Layer, as specified in the IPv6 Backbone Router | |||
| [RFC8929]. | [RFC8929]. | |||
| On the one hand, WiND avoids the use of broadcast operation for DAD | On the one hand, WiND avoids the use of broadcast operation for DAD | |||
| and AR, and on the other hand, WiND supports use cases where subnet | and AR, and on the other hand, WiND supports use cases where subnet | |||
| and Link Layer domains are not congruent, which is common in wireless | and link-layer domains are not congruent, which is common in wireless | |||
| networks unless a specific Link Layer emulation is provided. More | networks unless a specific link-layer emulation is provided. More | |||
| details on WiND can be found in Section 5.1. | details on WiND can be found in Section 5.1. | |||
| 4. IP Models | 4. IP Models | |||
| 4.1. Physical Broadcast Domain | 4.1. Physical Broadcast Domain | |||
| At the physical (PHY) Layer, a broadcast domain is the set of nodes | At the physical (PHY) Layer, a broadcast domain is the set of nodes | |||
| that may receive a transmission that one sends over an interface, in | that may receive a transmission that one sends over an interface, in | |||
| other words the set of nodes in range of the radio transmission. | other words the set of nodes in range of the radio transmission. | |||
| This set can comprise a single peer on a serial cable used as point- | This set can comprise a single peer on a serial cable used as point- | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 12 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 20 ¶ | |||
| that the connectivity becomes mostly uni-directional, e.g., A to B | that the connectivity becomes mostly uni-directional, e.g., A to B | |||
| but practically not B to A. | but practically not B to A. | |||
| It takes a particular effort to place a set of devices in a fashion | It takes a particular effort to place a set of devices in a fashion | |||
| that all their physical broadcast domains fully overlap, and that | that all their physical broadcast domains fully overlap, and that | |||
| specific situation can not be assumed in the general case. In other | specific situation can not be assumed in the general case. In other | |||
| words, the relation of radio connectivity is generally not | words, the relation of radio connectivity is generally not | |||
| transitive, meaning that A in range with B and B in range with C does | transitive, meaning that A in range with B and B in range with C does | |||
| not necessarily imply that A is in range with C. | not necessarily imply that A is in range with C. | |||
| 4.2. Link Layer Broadcast Emulations | 4.2. link-layer Broadcast Emulations | |||
| We call Direct MAC Broadcast (DMB) the transmission mode where the | We call Direct MAC Broadcast (DMB) the transmission mode where the | |||
| broadcast domain that is usable at the MAC layer is directly the | broadcast domain that is usable at the MAC layer is directly the | |||
| physical broadcast domain. [IEEE Std. 802.15.4] and [IEEE Std. | physical broadcast domain. IEEE Std. 802.15.4 [IEEE Std. 802.15.4] | |||
| 802.11] OCB (for Out of the Context of a BSS) are examples of DMB | and IEEE Std. 802.11 [IEEE Std. 802.11] OCB (for Out of the Context | |||
| radios. DMB networks provide mostly symmetric and non-transitive | of a BSS) are examples of DMB radios. DMB networks provide mostly | |||
| transmission. This contrasts with a number of Link Layer Broadcast | symmetric and non-transitive transmission. This contrasts with a | |||
| Emulation (LLBE) schemes that are described in this section. | number of link-layer Broadcast Emulation (LLBE) schemes that are | |||
| described in this section. | ||||
| In the case of Ethernet, while a physical broadcast domain is | In the case of Ethernet, while a physical broadcast domain is | |||
| constrained to a single shared wire, the [IEEE Std. 802.1] bridging | constrained to a single shared wire, the IEEE Std. 802.1 [IEEE Std. | |||
| function emulates the broadcast properties of that wire over a whole | 802.1] bridging function emulates the broadcast properties of that | |||
| physical mesh of Ethernet links. For the upper layer, the qualities | wire over a whole physical mesh of Ethernet links. For the upper | |||
| of the shared wire are essentially conserved, with a reliable and | layer, the qualities of the shared wire are essentially conserved, | |||
| cheap broadcast operation over a transitive closure of nodes defined | with a reliable and cheap broadcast operation over a transitive | |||
| by their connectivity to the emulated wire. | closure of nodes defined by their connectivity to the emulated wire. | |||
| In large switched fabrics, overlay techniques enable a limited | In large switched fabrics, overlay techniques enable a limited | |||
| connectivity between nodes that are known to a Map Resolver. The | connectivity between nodes that are known to a Map Resolver. The | |||
| emulated broadcast domain is configured to the system, e.g., with a | emulated broadcast domain is configured to the system, e.g., with a | |||
| VXLAN network identifier (VNID). Broadcast operations on the overlay | VXLAN network identifier (VNID). Broadcast operations on the overlay | |||
| can be emulated but can become very expensive, and it makes sense to | can be emulated but can become very expensive, and it makes sense to | |||
| proactively install the relevant state in the mapping server as | proactively install the relevant state in the mapping server as | |||
| opposed to rely on reactive broadcast lookups to do so. | opposed to rely on reactive broadcast lookups to do so. | |||
| An [IEEE Std. 802.11] Infrastructure Basic Service Set (BSS) also | An IEEE Std. 802.11 [IEEE Std. 802.11] Infrastructure Basic Service | |||
| provides a transitive closure of nodes as defined by the broadcast | Set (BSS) also provides a transitive closure of nodes as defined by | |||
| domain of a central AP. The AP relays both unicast and broadcast | the broadcast domain of a central AP. The AP relays both unicast and | |||
| packets and provides the symmetric and transitive emulation of a | broadcast packets and provides the symmetric and transitive emulation | |||
| shared wire between the associated nodes, with the capability to | of a shared wire between the associated nodes, with the capability to | |||
| signal link-up/link-down to the upper layer. Within a BSS, the | signal link-up/link-down to the upper layer. Within a BSS, the | |||
| physical broadcast domain of the AP serves as emulated broadcast | physical broadcast domain of the AP serves as emulated broadcast | |||
| domain for all the nodes that are associated to the AP. Broadcast | domain for all the nodes that are associated to the AP. Broadcast | |||
| packets are relayed by the AP and are not acknowledged. To increase | packets are relayed by the AP and are not acknowledged. To increase | |||
| the chances that all nodes in the BSS receive the broadcast | the chances that all nodes in the BSS receive the broadcast | |||
| transmission, AP transmits at the slowest PHY speed. This translates | transmission, AP transmits at the slowest PHY speed. This translates | |||
| into maximum co-channel interferences for others and the longest | into maximum co-channel interferences for others and the longest | |||
| occupancy of the medium, for a duration that can be a hundred times | occupancy of the medium, for a duration that can be a hundred times | |||
| that of the unicast transmission of a frame of the same size. | that of the unicast transmission of a frame of the same size. | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 27 ¶ | |||
| of unicast transmissions, or drop the message altogether, which may | of unicast transmissions, or drop the message altogether, which may | |||
| impact the upper layer protocols. For instance, some APs may not | impact the upper layer protocols. For instance, some APs may not | |||
| copy Router Solicitation (RS) messages under the assumption that | copy Router Solicitation (RS) messages under the assumption that | |||
| there is no router across the wireless interface. This assumption | there is no router across the wireless interface. This assumption | |||
| may be correct at some point of time and may become incorrect in the | may be correct at some point of time and may become incorrect in the | |||
| future. Another strategy used in Wi-Fi APS is to proxy protocols | future. Another strategy used in Wi-Fi APS is to proxy protocols | |||
| that heavily rely on broadcast, such as the Address Resolution in ARP | that heavily rely on broadcast, such as the Address Resolution in ARP | |||
| and ND-Classic, and either respond on behalf or preferably forward | and ND-Classic, and either respond on behalf or preferably forward | |||
| the broadcast frame as a unicast to the intended Target. | the broadcast frame as a unicast to the intended Target. | |||
| In an [IEEE Std. 802.11] Infrastructure Extended Service Set (ESS), | In an IEEE Std. 802.11 [IEEE Std. 802.11] Infrastructure Extended | |||
| infrastructure BSSes are interconnected by a bridged network, | Service Set (ESS), infrastructure BSSes are interconnected by a | |||
| typically running Transparent Bridging and the Spanning tree Protocol | bridged network, typically running Transparent Bridging and the | |||
| or a more advanced Layer 2 Routing (L2R) scheme. In the original | Spanning tree Protocol or a more advanced Layer 2 Routing (L2R) | |||
| model of learning bridges, the forwarding state is set by observing | scheme. In the original model of learning bridges, the forwarding | |||
| the source MAC address of the frames. When a state is missing for a | state is set by observing the source MAC address of the frames. When | |||
| destination MAC address, the frame is broadcasted with the | a state is missing for a destination MAC address, the frame is | |||
| expectation that the response will populate the state on the reverse | broadcasted with the expectation that the response will populate the | |||
| path. This is a reactive operation, meaning that the state is | state on the reverse path. This is a reactive operation, meaning | |||
| populated reactively to the need to reach a destination. It is also | that the state is populated reactively to the need to reach a | |||
| possible in the original model to broadcast a gratuitous frame to | destination. It is also possible in the original model to broadcast | |||
| advertise self throughout the bridged network, and that is also a | a gratuitous frame to advertise self throughout the bridged network, | |||
| broadcast. | and that is also a broadcast. | |||
| The process of the Wi-Fi association prepares a bridging state | The process of the Wi-Fi association prepares a bridging state | |||
| proactively at the AP, which avoids the need for a reactive broadcast | proactively at the AP, which avoids the need for a reactive broadcast | |||
| lookup over the wireless access. In an ESS, the AP may also generate | lookup over the wireless access. In an ESS, the AP may also generate | |||
| a gratuitous broadcast sourced at the MAC address of the STA to | a gratuitous broadcast sourced at the MAC address of the STA to | |||
| prepare or update the state in the learning bridges so they point | prepare or update the state in the learning bridges so they point | |||
| towards the AP for the MAC address of the STA. WiND emulates that | towards the AP for the MAC address of the STA. WiND emulates that | |||
| proactive method at the Network Layer for the operations of AR, DAD | proactive method at the Network Layer for the operations of AR, DAD | |||
| and ND proxy. | and ND proxy. | |||
| In some instances of WLANs and LoWPANs, a Mesh-Under technology | In some instances of WLANs and LoWPANs, a Mesh-Under technology | |||
| (e.g., a IEEE Std. 802.11s or IEEE Std. 802.15.10) provides meshing | (e.g., a IEEE Std. 802.11s or IEEE Std. 802.15.10) provides meshing | |||
| services that are similar to bridging, and the broadcast domain is | services that are similar to bridging, and the broadcast domain is | |||
| well-defined by the membership of the mesh. Mesh-Under emulates a | well-defined by the membership of the mesh. Mesh-Under emulates a | |||
| broadcast domain by flooding the broadcast packets at the Link Layer. | broadcast domain by flooding the broadcast packets at the link-layer. | |||
| When operating on a single frequency, this operation is known to | When operating on a single frequency, this operation is known to | |||
| interfere with itself, and requires inter-frame gaps to dampen the | interfere with itself, and requires inter-frame gaps to dampen the | |||
| collisions, which reduces further the amount of available bandwidth. | collisions, which reduces further the amount of available bandwidth. | |||
| As the cost of broadcast transmissions becomes increasingly | As the cost of broadcast transmissions becomes increasingly | |||
| expensive, there is a push to rethink the upper Layer protocols to | expensive, there is a push to rethink the upper Layer protocols to | |||
| reduce the dependency on broadcast operations. | reduce the dependency on broadcast operations. | |||
| 4.3. Mapping the IPv6 link Abstraction | 4.3. Mapping the IPv6 link Abstraction | |||
| IPv6 defines a concept of Link, link Scope and Link-Local Addresses | As introduced in Section 2.1, IPv6 defines a concept of Link, link | |||
| (LLA), an LLA being unique and usable only within the Scope of a | Scope and Link-Local Addresses (LLA), an LLA being unique and usable | |||
| Link. The ND-Classic [RFC4861] DAD [RFC4862] process uses a | only within the Scope of a Link. The ND-Classic [RFC4861] DAD | |||
| multicast transmission to detect a duplicate address, which requires | [RFC4862] process uses a multicast transmission to detect a duplicate | |||
| that the owner of the address is connected to the Link Layer | address, which requires that the owner of the address is connected to | |||
| broadcast domain of the sender. | the link-layer broadcast domain of the sender. | |||
| On wired media, the link is often confused with the physical | On wired media, the link is often confused with the physical | |||
| broadcast domain because both are determined by the serial cable or | broadcast domain because both are determined by the serial cable or | |||
| the Ethernet shared wire. Ethernet Bridging reinforces that illusion | the Ethernet shared wire. Ethernet Bridging reinforces that illusion | |||
| with a Link Layer broadcast domain that emulates a physical broadcast | with a link-layer broadcast domain that emulates a physical broadcast | |||
| domain over the mesh of wires. But the difference shows on legacy | domain over the mesh of wires. But the difference shows on legacy | |||
| Non-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA) networks such as ATM and Frame- | Non-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA) networks such as ATM and Frame- | |||
| Relay, on shared links and on newer types of NBMA networks such as | Relay, on shared links and on newer types of NBMA networks such as | |||
| radio and composite radio-wires networks. It also shows when private | radio and composite radio-wires networks. It also shows when private | |||
| VLANs or Link Layer cryptography restrict the capability to read a | VLANs or link-layer cryptography restrict the capability to read a | |||
| frame to a subset of the connected nodes. | frame to a subset of the connected nodes. | |||
| In Mesh-Under and Infrastructure BSS, the IP link extends beyond the | In Mesh-Under and Infrastructure BSS, the IP link extends beyond the | |||
| physical broadcast domain to the emulated Link Layer broadcast | physical broadcast domain to the emulated link-layer broadcast | |||
| domain. Relying on Multicast for the ND operation remains feasible | domain. Relying on Multicast for the ND operation remains feasible | |||
| but becomes highly detrimental to the unicast traffic, and becomes | but becomes highly detrimental to the unicast traffic, and becomes | |||
| less and less energy-efficient and reliable as the network grows. | less and less energy-efficient and reliable as the network grows. | |||
| On DMB radios, IP links between peers come and go as the individual | On DMB radios, IP links between peers come and go as the individual | |||
| physical broadcast domains of the transmitters meet and overlap. The | physical broadcast domains of the transmitters meet and overlap. The | |||
| DAD operation cannot provide once and for all guarantees over the | DAD operation cannot provide once and for all guarantees over the | |||
| broadcast domain defined by one radio transmitter if that transmitter | broadcast domain defined by one radio transmitter if that transmitter | |||
| keeps meeting new peers on the go. | keeps meeting new peers on the go. | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 7 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 19 ¶ | |||
| The DAD and AR procedures in ND-Classic expect that a node in a | The DAD and AR procedures in ND-Classic expect that a node in a | |||
| subnet is reachable within the broadcast domain of any other node in | subnet is reachable within the broadcast domain of any other node in | |||
| the subnet when that other node attempts to form an address that | the subnet when that other node attempts to form an address that | |||
| would be a duplicate or attempts to resolve the MAC address of this | would be a duplicate or attempts to resolve the MAC address of this | |||
| node. This is why ND is applicable for P2P and transit links, but | node. This is why ND is applicable for P2P and transit links, but | |||
| requires extensions for more complex topologies. | requires extensions for more complex topologies. | |||
| 4.4. Mapping the IPv6 subnet Abstraction | 4.4. Mapping the IPv6 subnet Abstraction | |||
| IPv6 also defines the concept of a subnet for Global and Unique Local | As introduced in Section 2.2, IPv6 also defines the concept of a | |||
| Addresses (GLA and ULA). All the addresses in a subnet share the | subnet for Global and Unique Local Addresses (GLA and ULA). All the | |||
| same prefix, and by extension, a node belongs to a subnet if it has | addresses in a subnet share the same prefix, and by extension, a node | |||
| an address that derives from the prefix of the subnet. That address | belongs to a subnet if it has an address that derives from the prefix | |||
| must be topologically correct, meaning that it must be installed on | of the subnet. That address must be topologically correct, meaning | |||
| an interface that is connected to the subnet. | that it must be installed on an interface that is connected to the | |||
| subnet. | ||||
| Unless intently replicated in different locations for very specific | Unless intently replicated in different locations for very specific | |||
| purposes, a subnet prefix is unique within a routing system; for | purposes, a subnet prefix is unique within a routing system; for | |||
| ULAs, the routing system is typically a limited domain, whereas for | ULAs, the routing system is typically a limited domain, whereas for | |||
| GLAs, it is the whole Internet. | GLAs, it is the whole Internet. | |||
| For that reason, it is sufficient to validate that an address that is | For that reason, it is sufficient to validate that an address that is | |||
| formed from a subnet prefix is unique within the scope of that subnet | formed from a subnet prefix is unique within the scope of that subnet | |||
| to guarantee that it is globally unique within the whole routing | to guarantee that it is globally unique within the whole routing | |||
| system. Note that a subnet may become partitioned due to the loss of | system. Note that a subnet may become partitioned due to the loss of | |||
| a wired or wireless link, so even that operation is not necessarily | a wired or wireless link, so even that operation is not necessarily | |||
| obvious, more in [DAD APPROACHES]. | obvious, more in [DAD APPROACHES]. | |||
| The IPv6 aggregation model relies on the property that a packet from | The IPv6 aggregation model relies on the property that a packet from | |||
| the outside of a subnet can be routed to any router that belongs to | the outside of a subnet can be routed to any router that belongs to | |||
| the subnet, and that this router will be able to either resolve the | the subnet, and that this router will be able to either resolve the | |||
| destination Link Layer address and deliver the packet, or, in the | destination link-layer address and deliver the packet, or, in the | |||
| case of an MLSN, route the packet to the destination within the | case of an MLSN, route the packet to the destination within the | |||
| subnet. | subnet. | |||
| If the subnet is known as on-link, then any node may also resolve the | If the subnet is known as on-link, then any node may also resolve the | |||
| destination Link Layer address and deliver the packet, but if the | destination link-layer address and deliver the packet, but if the | |||
| subnet is not on-link, then a host in the subnet that does not have a | subnet is not on-link, then a host in the subnet that does not have a | |||
| Neighbor Cache Entry (NCE) for the destination will also need to pass | Neighbor Cache Entry (NCE) for the destination will also need to pass | |||
| the packet to a router, more in [RFC5942]. | the packet to a router, more in [RFC5942]. | |||
| On Ethernet, an IP subnet is often congruent with an IP link because | On Ethernet, an IP subnet is often congruent with an IP link because | |||
| both are determined by the physical attachment to a shared wire or an | both are determined by the physical attachment to a shared wire or an | |||
| IEEE Std. 802.1 bridged domain. In that case, the connectivity over | IEEE Std. 802.1 bridged domain. In that case, the connectivity over | |||
| the link is both symmetric and transitive, the subnet can appear as | the link is both symmetric and transitive, the subnet can appear as | |||
| on-link, and any node can resolve a destination MAC address of any | on-link, and any node can resolve a destination MAC address of any | |||
| other node directly using ND-Classic. | other node directly using ND-Classic. | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 43 ¶ | |||
| subnet. But the DAD operation is performed as a unicast exchange | subnet. But the DAD operation is performed as a unicast exchange | |||
| with a central registrar, using new ND Extended Duplicate Address | with a central registrar, using new ND Extended Duplicate Address | |||
| messages (EDAR and EDAC) [RFC6775][RFC8505]. This modernizes ND for | messages (EDAR and EDAC) [RFC6775][RFC8505]. This modernizes ND for | |||
| application in overlays with Map Resolvers and enables unicast | application in overlays with Map Resolvers and enables unicast | |||
| lookups [UNICAST AR] for addresses registered to the resolver. | lookups [UNICAST AR] for addresses registered to the resolver. | |||
| The proactive address registration is performed with a new option in | The proactive address registration is performed with a new option in | |||
| NS/NA messages, the Extended Address Registration Option (EARO) | NS/NA messages, the Extended Address Registration Option (EARO) | |||
| defined in [RFC8505]. This method allows to prepare and maintain the | defined in [RFC8505]. This method allows to prepare and maintain the | |||
| host routes in the routers and avoids the reactive Address Resolution | host routes in the routers and avoids the reactive Address Resolution | |||
| in ND-Classic and the associated Link Layer broadcasts transmissions. | in ND-Classic and the associated link-layer broadcasts transmissions. | |||
| The EARO provides information to the router that is independent to | The EARO provides information to the router that is independent to | |||
| the routing protocol and routing can take multiple forms, from a | the routing protocol and routing can take multiple forms, from a | |||
| traditional IGP to a collapsed Hub-and-Spoke model where only one | traditional IGP to a collapsed Hub-and-Spoke model where only one | |||
| router owns and advertises the prefix. [RFC8505] is already | router owns and advertises the prefix. [RFC8505] is already | |||
| referenced as the registrtaion interface to "RIFT: Routing in Fat | referenced as the registration interface to "RIFT: Routing in Fat | |||
| Trees" [I-D.ietf-rift-rift] and "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for | Trees" [I-D.ietf-rift-rift] and "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for | |||
| Low-Power and Lossy Networks" [RFC6550] with [RPL UNAWARE LEAVES]. | Low-Power and Lossy Networks" [RFC6550] with [RPL UNAWARE LEAVES]. | |||
| WiND also enables to span a subnet over an MLSN that federates edge | WiND also enables to span a subnet over an MLSN that federates edge | |||
| wireless links with a high-speed, typically Ethernet, backbone. This | wireless links with a high-speed, typically Ethernet, backbone. This | |||
| way, nodes can form any address they want and move freely from a | way, nodes can form any address they want and move freely from a | |||
| wireless edge link to another, without renumbering. Backbone Routers | wireless edge link to another, without renumbering. Backbone Routers | |||
| (6BBRs) placed along the wireless edge of the Backbone handle IPv6 | (6BBRs) placed along the wireless edge of the Backbone handle IPv6 | |||
| Neighbor Discovery and forward packets over the backbone on behalf of | Neighbor Discovery and forward packets over the backbone on behalf of | |||
| the registered nodes on the wireless edge. | the registered nodes on the wireless edge. | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 38 ¶ | |||
| specified in [RPL UNAWARE LEAVES]. In a degraded mode, all the Hubs | specified in [RPL UNAWARE LEAVES]. In a degraded mode, all the Hubs | |||
| are connected to a same high speed backbone such as an Ethernet | are connected to a same high speed backbone such as an Ethernet | |||
| bridging domain where ND-Classic is operated. In that case, it is | bridging domain where ND-Classic is operated. In that case, it is | |||
| possible to federate the Hub, Spoke and Backbone nodes as a single | possible to federate the Hub, Spoke and Backbone nodes as a single | |||
| subnet, operating ND proxy operations [RFC8929] at the Hubs, acting | subnet, operating ND proxy operations [RFC8929] at the Hubs, acting | |||
| as 6BBRs. It can be observed that this latter design builds a form | as 6BBRs. It can be observed that this latter design builds a form | |||
| of Network Layer Infrastructure ESS. | of Network Layer Infrastructure ESS. | |||
| 6. WiND Applicability | 6. WiND Applicability | |||
| WiND applies equally to P2P links, P2MP Hub-and-Spoke, Link Layer | WiND applies equally to P2P links, P2MP Hub-and-Spoke, link-layer | |||
| Broadcast Domain Emulation such as Mesh-Under and Wi-Fi BSS, and | Broadcast Domain Emulation such as Mesh-Under and Wi-Fi BSS, and | |||
| Route-Over meshes. | Route-Over meshes. | |||
| There is an intersection where link and subnet are congruent and | There is an intersection where link and subnet are congruent and | |||
| where both ND and WiND could apply. These includes P2P, the MAC | where both ND and WiND could apply. These includes P2P, the MAC | |||
| emulation of a PHY broadcast domain, and the particular case of | emulation of a PHY broadcast domain, and the particular case of | |||
| always on, fully overlapping physical radio broadcast domain. But | always on, fully overlapping physical radio broadcast domain. But | |||
| even in those cases where both are possible, WiND is preferable vs. | even in those cases where both are possible, WiND is preferable vs. | |||
| ND because it reduces the need of broadcast. | ND because it reduces the need of broadcast. | |||
| This is discussed in more details in the introduction of [RFC8929]. | This is discussed in more details in the introduction of [RFC8929]. | |||
| There are also a number of practical use cases in the wireless world | There are also a number of practical use cases in the wireless world | |||
| where links and subnets are not congruent: | where links and subnets are not congruent: | |||
| * The IEEE Std. 802.11 infrastructure BSS enables one subnet per AP, | * The IEEE Std. 802.11 infrastructure BSS enables one subnet per AP, | |||
| and emulates a broadcast domain at the Link Layer. The | and emulates a broadcast domain at the link-layer. The | |||
| Infrastructure ESS extends that model over a backbone and | Infrastructure ESS extends that model over a backbone and | |||
| recommends the use of an ND proxy [IEEE Std. 802.11] to | recommends the use of an ND proxy [IEEE Std. 802.11] to | |||
| interoperate with Ethernet-connected nodes. WiND incorporates an | interoperate with Ethernet-connected nodes. WiND incorporates an | |||
| ND proxy to serve that need, which was missing so far. | ND proxy to serve that need, which was missing so far. | |||
| * BlueTooth is Hub-and-Spoke at the Link Layer. It would make | * BlueTooth is Hub-and-Spoke at the link-layer. It would make | |||
| little sense to configure a different subnet between the central | little sense to configure a different subnet between the central | |||
| and each individual peripheral node (e.g., sensor). Rather, | and each individual peripheral node (e.g., sensor). Rather, | |||
| [RFC7668] allocates a prefix to the central node acting as router, | [RFC7668] allocates a prefix to the central node acting as router, | |||
| and each peripheral host (acting as a host) forms one or more | and each peripheral host (acting as a host) forms one or more | |||
| address(es) from that same prefix and registers it. | address(es) from that same prefix and registers it. | |||
| * A typical Smartgrid networks puts together Route-Over MLSNs that | * A typical Smartgrid networks puts together Route-Over MLSNs that | |||
| comprise thousands of IPv6 nodes. The 6TiSCH architecture | comprise thousands of IPv6 nodes. The 6TiSCH architecture | |||
| [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] presents the Route-Over model over | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] presents the Route-Over model over | |||
| an IEEE Std. 802.15.4 Time-Slotted Channel-Hopping (TSCH) | an IEEE Std. 802.15.4 Time-Slotted Channel-Hopping (TSCH) | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 46 ¶ | |||
| Unreachability Detection, Address Resolution and Address Mobility to | Unreachability Detection, Address Resolution and Address Mobility to | |||
| transfer a role of ND proxy to the AP where a STA is associated | transfer a role of ND proxy to the AP where a STA is associated | |||
| following the mobility of the STA. | following the mobility of the STA. | |||
| The WiND proxy ND specification that associated to the Address | The WiND proxy ND specification that associated to the Address | |||
| Registration is [RFC8929]. With that specification, the AP | Registration is [RFC8929]. With that specification, the AP | |||
| participates to the protocol as a Backbone Router, typically | participates to the protocol as a Backbone Router, typically | |||
| operating as a bridging proxy though the routing proxy operation is | operating as a bridging proxy though the routing proxy operation is | |||
| also possible. As a bridging proxy, the backbone router either | also possible. As a bridging proxy, the backbone router either | |||
| replies to NS lookups with the MAC address of the STA, or preferably | replies to NS lookups with the MAC address of the STA, or preferably | |||
| forwards the lookups to the STA as Link Layer unicast frames to let | forwards the lookups to the STA as link-layer unicast frames to let | |||
| the STA answer. For the data plane, the backbone router acts as a | the STA answer. For the data plane, the backbone router acts as a | |||
| normal AP and bridges the packets to the STA as usual. As a routing | normal AP and bridges the packets to the STA as usual. As a routing | |||
| proxy, the backbone router replies with its own MAC address and then | proxy, the backbone router replies with its own MAC address and then | |||
| routes to the STA at the IP layer. The routing proxy reduces the | routes to the STA at the IP layer. The routing proxy reduces the | |||
| need to expose the MAC address of the STA on the wired side, for a | need to expose the MAC address of the STA on the wired side, for a | |||
| better stability and scalability of the bridged fabric. | better stability and scalability of the bridged fabric. | |||
| 6.3. Case of Mesh Under Technologies | 6.3. Case of Mesh Under Technologies | |||
| The Mesh-Under provides a broadcast domain emulation with symmetric | The Mesh-Under provides a broadcast domain emulation with symmetric | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 23, line 19 ¶ | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8415>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8415>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-rift-rift] | [I-D.ietf-rift-rift] | |||
| Przygienda, T., Sharma, A., Thubert, P., Rijsman, B., and | Przygienda, T., Sharma, A., Thubert, P., Rijsman, B., and | |||
| D. Afanasiev, "RIFT: Routing in Fat Trees", Work in | D. Afanasiev, "RIFT: Routing in Fat Trees", Work in | |||
| Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rift-rift-12, 26 May | Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-rift-rift-12, 26 May | |||
| 2020, | 2020, | |||
| <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rift-rift-12>. | <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rift-rift-12>. | |||
| [RPL UNAWARE LEAVES] | [RPL UNAWARE LEAVES] | |||
| Thubert, P. and M. Richardson, "Routing for RPL Leaves", | Thubert, P. and M. C. Richardson, "Routing for RPL | |||
| Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-roll-unaware- | (Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks) | |||
| leaves-23, 10 November 2020, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/ | Leaves", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf- | |||
| draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-23>. | roll-unaware-leaves-30, 22 January 2021, | |||
| <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-roll-unaware- | ||||
| leaves-30>. | ||||
| [DAD ISSUES] | [DAD ISSUES] | |||
| Yourtchenko, A. and E. Nordmark, "A survey of issues | Yourtchenko, A. and E. Nordmark, "A survey of issues | |||
| related to IPv6 Duplicate Address Detection", Work in | related to IPv6 Duplicate Address Detection", Work in | |||
| Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-yourtchenko-6man-dad- | Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-yourtchenko-6man-dad- | |||
| issues-01, 3 March 2015, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/ | issues-01, 3 March 2015, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/ | |||
| draft-yourtchenko-6man-dad-issues-01>. | draft-yourtchenko-6man-dad-issues-01>. | |||
| [MCAST EFFICIENCY] | [MCAST EFFICIENCY] | |||
| Vyncke, E., Thubert, P., Levy-Abegnoli, E., and A. | Vyncke, E., Thubert, P., Levy-Abegnoli, E., and A. | |||
| Yourtchenko, "Why Network-Layer Multicast is Not Always | Yourtchenko, "Why Network-Layer Multicast is Not Always | |||
| Efficient At Datalink Layer", Work in Progress, Internet- | Efficient At Datalink Layer", Work in Progress, Internet- | |||
| Draft, draft-vyncke-6man-mcast-not-efficient-01, 14 | Draft, draft-vyncke-6man-mcast-not-efficient-01, 14 | |||
| February 2014, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vyncke- | February 2014, <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vyncke- | |||
| 6man-mcast-not-efficient-01>. | 6man-mcast-not-efficient-01>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] | |||
| Thubert, P., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the TSCH mode | Thubert, P., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the TSCH mode | |||
| of IEEE 802.15.4", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, | of IEEE 802.15.4", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, | |||
| draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-29, 27 August 2020, | draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-30, 26 November 2020, | |||
| <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6tisch- | <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6tisch- | |||
| architecture-29>. | architecture-30>. | |||
| [MCAST PROBLEMS] | [MCAST PROBLEMS] | |||
| Perkins, C., McBride, M., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and J. | Perkins, C. E., McBride, M., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and | |||
| Zuniga, "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless | J. C. Zuniga, "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 | |||
| Media", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf- | Wireless Media", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- | |||
| mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-12, 26 October 2020, | ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-13, 4 February 2021, | |||
| <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802- | <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802- | |||
| mcast-problems-12>. | mcast-problems-13>. | |||
| [SAVI] Bi, J., Wu, J., Wang, Y., and T. Lin, "A SAVI Solution for | [SAVI] Bi, J., Wu, J., Wang, Y., and T. Lin, "A SAVI Solution for | |||
| WLAN", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-bi-savi- | WLAN", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-bi-savi- | |||
| wlan-20, 14 November 2020, | wlan-20, 14 November 2020, | |||
| <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bi-savi-wlan-20>. | <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bi-savi-wlan-20>. | |||
| [UNICAST AR] | [UNICAST AR] | |||
| Thubert, P. and E. Levy-Abegnoli, "IPv6 Neighbor Discovery | Thubert, P. and E. Levy-Abegnoli, "IPv6 Neighbor Discovery | |||
| Unicast Lookup", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- | Unicast Lookup", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft- | |||
| thubert-6lo-unicast-lookup-00, 25 January 2019, | thubert-6lo-unicast-lookup-00, 25 January 2019, | |||
| End of changes. 37 change blocks. | ||||
| 110 lines changed or deleted | 197 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/ | ||||