< draft-ietf-roll-urban-routing-reqs-04.txt		draft-ietf-roll-urban-routing-reqs-05.txt >
	Networking Working Group M. Dohler, Ed.		Networking Working Group M. Dohler, Ed.
	Internet-Draft CTTC		Internet-Draft CTTC
	Intended status: Informational T. Watteyne, Ed.		Intended status: Informational T. Watteyne, Ed.
	Expires: August 16, 2009 CITI-Lab, INRIA A4RES		Expires: October 1, 2009 CITI-Lab, INRIA A4RES
	T. Winter, Ed.		T. Winter, Ed.
	Eka Systems		Eka Systems
	D. Barthel, Ed.		D. Barthel, Ed.
	France Telecom R&D		France Telecom R&D
	February 12, 2009		March 30, 2009
	Urban WSNs Routing Requirements in Low Power and Lossy Networks		Urban WSNs Routing Requirements in Low Power and Lossy Networks
	draft-ietf-roll-urban-routing-reqs-04		draft-ietf-roll-urban-routing-reqs-05
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that		Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
	other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-		other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
	Drafts.		Drafts.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 37 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 37 ¶
	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."
	The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at		The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.		http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
	The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at		The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.		http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
	This Internet-Draft will expire on August 16, 2009.		This Internet-Draft will expire on October 1, 2009.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		and restrictions with respect to this document.
	to this document.
	Abstract		Abstract
	The application-specific routing requirements for Urban Low Power and		The application-specific routing requirements for Urban Low Power and
	Lossy Networks (U-LLNs) are presented in this document. In the near		Lossy Networks (U-LLNs) are presented in this document. In the near
	future, sensing and actuating nodes will be placed outdoors in urban		future, sensing and actuating nodes will be placed outdoors in urban
	environments so as to improve the people's living conditions as well		environments so as to improve the people's living conditions as well
	as to monitor compliance with increasingly strict environmental laws.		as to monitor compliance with increasingly strict environmental laws.
	These field nodes are expected to measure and report a wide gamut of		These field nodes are expected to measure and report a wide gamut of
	data, such as required in smart metering, waste disposal,		data, such as required in smart metering, waste disposal,
	skipping to change at page 14, line 38 ¶		skipping to change at page 14, line 38 ¶
	be as important as of another node; the battery scavenging methods		be as important as of another node; the battery scavenging methods
	may recharge the battery at regular or irregular intervals; some		may recharge the battery at regular or irregular intervals; some
	nodes may have a constant power source; some nodes may have a larger		nodes may have a constant power source; some nodes may have a larger
	memory and are hence be able to store more neighborhood information;		memory and are hence be able to store more neighborhood information;
	some nodes may have a stronger CPU and are hence able to perform more		some nodes may have a stronger CPU and are hence able to perform more
	sophisticated data aggregation methods; etc.		sophisticated data aggregation methods; etc.
	To this end, the routing protocol(s) MUST support parameter		To this end, the routing protocol(s) MUST support parameter
	constrained routing, where examples of such parameters (CPU, memory		constrained routing, where examples of such parameters (CPU, memory
	size, battery level, etc.) have been given in the previous paragraph.		size, battery level, etc.) have been given in the previous paragraph.
			In other words the routing protocol MUST be able to advertise node
			capabilities that will be exclusively used by the routing protocol
			engine for routing decision. For the sake of example, such
			capability could be related to the node capability itself (e.g.
			remaining power) or some application that could influence routing
			(e.g. capability to aggregate data).
	Routing within urban sensor networks SHOULD require the U-LLN nodes		Routing within urban sensor networks SHOULD require the U-LLN nodes
	to dynamically compute, select and install different paths towards a		to dynamically compute, select and install different paths towards a
	same destination, depending on the nature of the traffic. Such		same destination, depending on the nature of the traffic. Such
	functionality in support of, for example, data aggregation, may imply		functionality in support of, for example, data aggregation, may imply
	to use some mechanisms to mark/tag the traffic for appropriate		to use some mechanisms to mark/tag the traffic for appropriate
	routing decision using the IPv6 packet format (e.g. use of DSCP, Flow		routing decision using the IPv6 packet format (e.g. use of DSCP, Flow
	Label) based on an upper layer marking decision. From this		Label) based on an upper layer marking decision. From this
	perspective, such nodes MAY use node capabilities (e.g. to act as an		perspective, such nodes MAY use node capabilities (e.g. to act as an
	aggregator) in conjunction with the anycast endpoints and packet		aggregator) in conjunction with the anycast endpoints and packet
	skipping to change at page 19, line 13 ¶		skipping to change at page 19, line 17 ¶
	the context of U-LLNs MUST support authentication and integrity		the context of U-LLNs MUST support authentication and integrity
	measures and SHOULD support confidentiality (routing security)		measures and SHOULD support confidentiality (routing security)
	measures.		measures.
	8. IANA Considerations		8. IANA Considerations
	This document makes no request of IANA.		This document makes no request of IANA.
	9. Acknowledgements		9. Acknowledgements
	The in-depth feedback of JP Vasseur, Jonathan Hui, and Iain Calder is		The in-depth feedback of JP Vasseur, Jonathan Hui, Iain Calder, and
	greatly appreciated.		Pasi Eronen is greatly appreciated.
	10. References		10. References
	10.1. Normative References		10.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	10.2. Informative References		10.2. Informative References
End of changes. 7 change blocks.
	11 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/