idnits 2.17.1 draft-clausen-lln-loadng-10.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document has an IETF Trust Provisions (28 Dec 2009) Section 6.c(i) Publication Limitation clause. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 655 has weird spacing: '...-length is an...' == Line 660 has weird spacing: '...seq-num is an...' == Line 664 has weird spacing: '...ic-type is an...' == Line 667 has weird spacing: '...-metric is a ...' == Line 672 has weird spacing: '...p-count is an...' == (30 more instances...) == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD', or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. Please use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you mean). Found 'MUST not' in this paragraph: +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ | RREQ Element | RFC5444-Element | Considerations | +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ | RREQ.addr-length | | Supports addresses from | | | | 1-16 octets | | RREQ.seq-num | | 16 bits, hence MAXVALUE | | | | (Section 8) is 65535. | | | | MUST be included | | RREQ.metric-type | METRIC Message | Encoded by way of the | | | TLV | Type-Extension of a | | | | Message-Type-specific | | | | Message TLV of type | | | | METRIC, defined in | | | | Table 8. A LOADng Router | | | | generating an RREQ (as | | | | specified in | | | | Section 12.1) when using | | | | the HOP_COUNT metric, | | | | MUST NOT add the METRIC | | | | Message TLV to the RREQ | | | | (in order to reduce | | | | overhead, as the hop | | | | count value is already | | | | encoded in | | | | RREQ.hop-count). LOADng | | | | Routers receiving an RREQ | | | | without METRIC Message | | | | TLV assume that | | | | RREQ.metric-type is | | | | HOP_COUNT, and MUST not | | | | add the METRIC Message | | | | TLV when forwarding the | | | | message. Otherwise, | | | | exactly one METRIC TLV | | | | MUST be included in each | | | | RREQ message. | | RREQ.route-metric | METRIC Message | Encoded as the value | | | TLV value | field of the METRIC TLV. | | | | (LOADng Routers | | | | generating RREQs when | | | | using the HOP_COUNT | | | | metric do not need need | | | | to add the METRIC Message | | | | TLV, as specified above | | | | for the RREQ.metric-type | | | | field.) | | RREQ.hop-limit | | 8 bits. MUST be included | | | | in an RREQ message | | RREQ.hop-count | | 8 bits, hence | | | | MAX_HOP_COUNT is 255. | | | | MUST be included in an | | | | RREQ message. | | RREQ.originator | | MUST be included in an | | | | RREQ message. | | RREQ.destination | Address in | Encoded by way of an | | | Address-Block | address in an address | | | w/TLV | block, with which a | | | | Message-Type-specific | | | | Address Block TLV of type | | | | ADDR-TYPE and with | | | | Type-Extension | | | | DESTINATION is | | | | associated, defined in | | | | Table 9. An RREQ MUST | | | | contain exactly one | | | | address with a TLV of | | | | type ADDR-TYPE and with | | | | Type-Extension | | | | DESTINATION associated. | +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD', or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. Please use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you mean). Found 'MUST not' in this paragraph: +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ | RREP Element | RFC5444-Element | Considerations | +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ | RREP.addr-length | | Supports addresses from | | | | 1-16 octets | | RREP.seq-num | | 16 bits, hence MAXVALUE | | | | (Section 8) is 65535. | | | | MUST be included | | RREP.metric-type | METRIC Message | Encoded by way of the | | | TLV | Type-Extension of a | | | | Message-Type-specific | | | | Message TLV of type | | | | METRIC, defined in | | | | Table 12. A LOADng Router | | | | generating an RREP (as | | | | specified in | | | | Section 13.1) when using | | | | the HOP_COUNT metric, | | | | MUST NOT add the METRIC | | | | Message TLV to the RREP | | | | (in order to reduce | | | | overhead, as the hop | | | | count value is already | | | | encoded in | | | | RREP.hop-count). LOADng | | | | Routers receiving an RREP | | | | without METRIC Message | | | | TLV assume that | | | | RREP.metric-type is | | | | HOP_COUNT, and MUST not | | | | add the METRIC Message | | | | TLV when forwarding the | | | | message. Otherwise, | | | | exactly one METRIC TLV | | | | MUST be included in each | | | | RREP message. | | RREP.route-metric | METRIC Message | Encoded as the value | | | TLV value | field of the METRIC TLV. | | | | (LOADng Routers | | | | generating RREPs when | | | | using the HOP_COUNT | | | | metric do not need need | | | | to add the METRIC Message | | | | TLV, as specified above | | | | for the RREP.metric-type | | | | field.) | | RREP.ackrequired | FLAGS Message TLV | Encoded by way of a | | | | Message-Type-specific | | | | Message TLV of type | | | | FLAGS, defined in | | | | Table 13. A TLV of type | | | | FLAGS MUST always be | | | | included in an RREP | | | | message. | | RREP.hop-limit | | 8 bits. MUST be included | | | | in an RREQ message | | RREP.hop-count | | 8 bits, hence | | | | MAX_HOP_COUNT is 255. | | | | MUST be included in an | | | | RREP message. | | RREP.originator | | MUST be included in an | | | | RREP message. | | RREP.destination | Address in | Encoded by way of an | | | Address-Block | address in an address | | | w/TLV | block, with which a | | | | Message-Type-specific | | | | Address Block TLV of type | | | | ADDR-TYPE and with | | | | Type-Extension | | | | DESTINATION is | | | | associated, defined in | | | | Table 14. An RREP MUST | | | | contain exactly one | | | | address with a TLV of | | | | type ADDR-TYPE and with | | | | Type-Extension | | | | DESTINATION associated. | +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ -- The document date (October 18, 2013) is 3843 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of draft-sheffer-running-code-01 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 10 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group T. Clausen 3 Internet-Draft A. Colin de Verdiere 4 Intended status: Standards Track J. Yi 5 Expires: April 21, 2014 LIX, Ecole Polytechnique 6 A. Niktash 7 Maxim Integrated Products 8 Y. Igarashi 9 H. Satoh 10 Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research 11 Laboratory 12 U. Herberg 13 Fujitsu Laboratories of America 14 C. Lavenu 15 EDF R&D 16 T. Lys 17 ERDF 18 J. Dean 19 Naval Research Laboratory 20 October 18, 2013 22 The Lightweight On-demand Ad hoc Distance-vector Routing Protocol - Next 23 Generation (LOADng) 24 draft-clausen-lln-loadng-10 26 Abstract 28 This document describes the Lightweight Ad hoc On-Demand - Next 29 Generation (LOADng) distance vector routing protocol, a reactive 30 routing protocol intended for use in Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs). 32 Status of This Memo 34 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 35 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified, 36 and derivative works of it may not be created, except to format it 37 for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 38 than English. 40 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 41 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 42 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 43 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 45 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 46 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 47 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 48 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 49 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 21, 2014. 51 Copyright Notice 53 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 54 document authors. All rights reserved. 56 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 57 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 58 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 59 publication of this document. Please review these documents 60 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 61 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 62 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 63 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 64 described in the Simplified BSD License. 66 Table of Contents 68 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 69 2. Terminology and Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 70 2.1. Message and Message Field Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 71 2.2. Variable Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 72 2.3. Other Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 73 2.4. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 74 3. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 75 4. Protocol Overview and Functioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 76 4.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 77 4.2. LOADng Routers and LOADng Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . 10 78 4.3. Information Base Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 79 4.4. Signaling Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 80 5. Protocol Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 81 5.1. Protocol and Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 82 5.2. Router Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 83 5.3. Interface Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 84 5.4. Constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 85 6. Protocol Message Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 86 6.1. Route Request (RREQ) Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 87 6.2. Route Reply (RREP) Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 88 6.3. Route Reply Acknowledgement (RREP_ACK) Messages . . . . . 17 89 6.4. Route Error (RERR) Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 90 7. Information Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 91 7.1. Routing Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 92 7.2. Local Interface Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 93 7.3. Blacklisted Neighbor Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 94 7.4. Destination Address Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 95 7.5. Pending Acknowledgment Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 96 8. LOADng Router Sequence Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 97 9. Route Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 98 10. Unidirectional Link Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 99 10.1. Blacklist Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 100 11. Common Rules for RREQ and RREP Messages . . . . . . . . . . . 25 101 11.1. Identifying Invalid RREQ or RREP Messages . . . . . . . . 26 102 11.2. RREQ and RREP Message Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 103 12. Route Requests (RREQs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 104 12.1. RREQ Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 105 12.2. RREQ Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 106 12.3. RREQ Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 107 12.4. RREQ Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 108 13. Route Replies (RREPs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 109 13.1. RREP Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 110 13.2. RREP Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 111 13.3. RREP Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 112 13.4. RREP Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 113 14. Route Errors (RERRs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 114 14.1. Identifying Invalid RERR Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 115 14.2. RERR Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 116 14.3. RERR Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 117 14.4. RERR Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 118 14.5. RERR Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 119 15. Route Reply Acknowledgments (RREP_ACKs) . . . . . . . . . . . 39 120 15.1. Identifying Invalid RREP_ACK Messages . . . . . . . . . . 39 121 15.2. RREP_ACK Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 122 15.3. RREP_ACK Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 123 15.4. RREP_ACK Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 124 15.5. RREP_ACK Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 125 16. Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 126 16.1. Specifying New Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 127 17. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 128 17.1. Implementation of Ecole Polytechnique . . . . . . . . . . 41 129 17.2. Implementation of Fujitsu Laboratories of America . . . . 42 130 17.3. Implementation of Hitachi Yokohama Research Laboratory 131 - 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 132 17.4. Implementation of Hitachi Yokohama Research Laboratory 133 -2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 134 18. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 135 18.1. Confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 136 18.2. Integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 137 18.3. Channel Jamming and State Explosion . . . . . . . . . . . 46 138 18.4. Interaction with External Routing Domains . . . . . . . . 47 139 19. LOADng Specific IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 140 19.1. Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 141 20. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 142 21. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 143 22. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 144 22.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 145 22.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 146 Appendix A. LOADng Control Messages using RFC5444 . . . . . . . . 50 147 A.1. RREQ-Specific Message Encoding Considerations . . . . . . 51 148 A.2. RREP-Specific Message Encoding Considerations . . . . . . 52 149 A.3. RREP_ACK Message Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 150 A.4. RERR Message Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 151 A.5. RFC5444-Specific IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 56 152 A.5.1. Expert Review: Evaluation Guidelines . . . . . . . . . 57 153 A.5.2. Message Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 154 A.6. RREQ Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries . . . . . . 57 155 A.7. RREP Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries . . . . . . 59 156 A.8. RREP_ACK Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries . . . . 61 157 A.9. RERR Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries . . . . . . 61 158 Appendix B. LOADng Control Packet Illustrations . . . . . . . . . 62 159 B.1. RREQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 160 B.2. RREP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 161 B.3. RREP_ACK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 162 B.4. RERR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 164 1. Introduction 166 The Lightweight On-demand Ad hoc Distance-vector Routing Protocol - 167 Next Generation (LOADng) is a routing protocol, derived from AODV 168 [RFC3561] and extended for use in Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs). 169 As a reactive protocol, the basic operations of LOADng include 170 generation of Route Requests (RREQs) by a LOADng Router (originator) 171 for when discovering a route to a destination, forwarding of such 172 RREQs until they reach the destination LOADng Router, generation of 173 Route Replies (RREPs) upon receipt of an RREQ by the indicated 174 destination, and unicast hop-by-hop forwarding of these RREPs towards 175 the originator. If a route is detected to be broken, e.g., if 176 forwarding of a data packet to the recorded next hop on the route 177 towards the intended destination is detected to fail, a Route Error 178 (RERR) message is returned to the originator of that data packet to 179 inform the originator about the route breakage. 181 Compared to [RFC3561], LOADng is simplified as follows: 183 o Only the destination is permitted to respond to an RREQ; 184 intermediate LOADng Routers are explicitly prohibited from 185 responding to RREQs, even if they may have active routes to the 186 sought destination, and RREQ/RREP messages generated by a given 187 LOADng Router share a single unique, monotonically increasing 188 sequence number. This also eliminates Gratuitous RREPs while 189 ensuring loop freedom. The rationale for this simplification is 190 reduced complexity of protocol operation and reduced message 191 sizes. 193 o A LOADng Router does not maintain a precursor list, thus when 194 forwarding of a data packet to the recorded next hop on the route 195 to the destination fails, an RERR is sent only to the originator 196 of that data packet. The rationale for this simplification is an 197 assumption that few overlapping routes are in use concurrently in 198 a given network. 200 Compared to [RFC3561], LOADng is extended as follows: 202 o Optimized flooding is supported, reducing the overhead incurred by 203 RREQ generation and flooding. If no optimized flooding operation 204 is specified for a given deployment, classical flooding is used by 205 default. 207 o Different address lengths are supported - from full 16 octet IPv6 208 addresses over 8 octet EUI64 addresss [EUI64], 6 octet MAC 209 addresses and 4 octet IPv4 addresses to shorter 1 and 2 octet 210 addresses such as [RFC4944]. The only requirement is, that within 211 a given routing domain, all addresses are of the same address 212 length. 214 o Control messages are carried by way of the Generalized MANET 215 Packet/Message Format [RFC5444]. 217 o Using [RFC5444], control messages can include TLV (Type-Length- 218 Value) elements, permitting protocol extensions to be developed. 220 o LOADng supports routing using arbitrary additive metrics, which 221 can be specified as extensions to this protocol. 223 2. Terminology and Notation 225 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 226 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 227 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in 228 [RFC2119]. 230 Additionally, this document uses the notations in Section 2.1, 231 Section 2.2, and Section 2.3 and the terminology defined in 232 Section 2.4. 234 2.1. Message and Message Field Notation 236 LOADng Routers generate and process messages, each of which has a 237 number of distinct fields. For describing the protocol operation, 238 specifically the generation and processing of such messages, the 239 following notation is employed: 241 MsgType.field 243 where: 245 MsgType - is the type of message (e.g., RREQ or RREP); 247 field - is the field in the message (e.g., originator). 249 The different messages, their fields and their meaning are described 250 in Section 6. The encoding of messages for transmission by way of 251 [RFC5444] packets/messages is described in Appendix A, and Appendix B 252 illustrates the bit layout of LOADng control messages. 254 The motivation for separating the high-level messages and their 255 content from the low-level encoding and frame format for transmission 256 is to allow discussions of the protocol logic to be separated from 257 the message encoding and frame format - and, to support different 258 frame formats. 260 2.2. Variable Notation 262 Variables are introduced into the specification solely as a means to 263 clarify the description. The following notation is used: 265 MsgType.field - If "field" is a field in the message MsgType, then 266 MsgType.field is also used to represent the value of that field. 268 bar - A variable (not prepended by MsgType), usually obtained 269 through calculations based on the value(s) of element(s). 271 2.3. Other Notation 273 This document uses the following additional notational conventions: 275 a := b An assignment operator, whereby the left side (a) is 276 assigned the value of the right side (b). 278 c = d A comparison operator, returning TRUE if the value of the 279 left side (c) is equal to the value of the right side (d). 281 2.4. Terminology 283 This document uses the following terminology: 285 LOADng Router - A router that implements this routing protocol. A 286 LOADng Router is equipped with at least one, and possibly more, 287 LOADng Interfaces. 289 LOADng Interface - A LOADng Router's attachment to a communications 290 medium, over which it receives and generates control messages, 291 according to this specification. A LOADng Interface is assigned 292 one or more addresses. 294 Link - A link between two LOADng Interfaces exists if either can 295 receive control messages, according to this specification, from 296 the other. 298 Message - The fundamental entity carrying protocol information, in 299 the form of address objects and TLVs. 301 Link Metric - The cost (weight) of a link between a pair of LOADng 302 Interfaces. 304 Route Metric - The sum of the Link Metrics for the links that an 305 RREQ or RREP has crossed. 307 3. Applicability Statement 309 LOADng is a reactive MANET protocol, i.e., routes are discovered only 310 when a data packet is sent by a router (e.g., on behalf of an 311 attached host), and when the router has no route for this 312 destination. In that case, the router floods Route Requests (RREQ) 313 throughout the network for discovering the destination. Reactive 314 protocols require state only for the routes currently in use, 315 contrary to proactive protocols, which periodically send control 316 traffic and store routes to all destinations in the network. As 317 MANETs are often operated on wireless channels, flooding RREQs may 318 lead to frame collisions and therefore data loss. Moreover, each 319 transmission on a network interface consumes energy, reducing the 320 life-time of battery-driven routers. Consequently, in order to 321 reduce the amount of control traffic, LOADng (and in general reactive 322 protocols) are most suitable under the following constraints: 324 o Few concurrent traffic flows in the network (i.e., traffic flows 325 only between few sources and destinations); 327 o Little data traffic overall, and therefore the traffic load from 328 periodic signaling (for proactive protocols) is greater than the 329 traffic load from flooding RREQs (for reactive protocols); 331 o State requirements on the router are very stringent, i.e., it is 332 beneficial to store only few routes on a router. 334 In these specific use cases, reactive MANET protocols have shown to 335 be beneficial, and may be preferable over the more general use case 336 of proactive MANET protocols. 338 Specifically, the applicability of LOADng is determined by its 339 characteristics, which are that this protocol: 341 o Is a reactive routing protocol for Mobile Ad hoc NETworks 342 (MANETs). 344 o Is designed to work in networks with dynamic topology in which the 345 links may be lossy due to collisions, channel instability, or 346 movement of routers. 348 o Supports the use of optimized flooding for RREQs. 350 o Enables any LOADng Router to discover bi-directional routes to 351 destinations in the routing domain, i.e., to any other LOADng 352 Router, as well as hosts or networks attached to that LOADng 353 Router, in the same routing domain. 355 o Supports addresses of any length with integral number of octets, 356 from 16 octets to a single octet. 358 o Is layer-agnostic, i.e., may be used at layer 3 as a "route over" 359 routing protocol, or at layer 2 as a "mesh under" routing 360 protocol. 362 o Supports per-destination route maintenance; if a destination 363 becomes unreachable, rediscovery of that single (bi-directional) 364 route is performed, without need for global topology 365 recalculation. 367 4. Protocol Overview and Functioning 369 The objective of this protocol is for each LOADng Router to, 370 independently: 372 o Discover a bi-directional route to any destination in the network. 374 o Establish a route only when there is data traffic to be sent along 375 that route. 377 o Maintain a route only for as long as there is data traffic being 378 sent along that route. 380 o Generate control traffic based on network events only: when a new 381 route is required, or when an active route is detected broken. 382 Specifically, this protocol does not require periodic signaling. 384 4.1. Overview 386 These objectives are achieved, for each LOADng Router, by performing 387 the following tasks: 389 o When having a data packet to deliver to a destination, for which 390 no tuple in the routing set exists and where the data packet 391 source is local to that LOADng Router (i.e., is an address in the 392 Local Interface Set or Destination Address Set of that LOADng 393 Router), generate a Route Request (RREQ) encoding the destination 394 address, and transmit this RREQ over all of its LOADng Interfaces. 396 o Upon receiving an RREQ, insert or refresh a tuple in the Routing 397 Set, recording a route towards the originator address from the 398 RREQ, as well as to the neighbor LOADng Router from which the RREQ 399 was received. This will install the Reverse Route (towards the 400 originator address from the RREQ). 402 o Upon receiving an RREQ, inspect the indicated destination address: 404 * If that address is an address in the Destination Address Set or 405 in the Local Interface Set of the LOADng Router, generate a 406 Route Reply (RREP), which is unicast in a hop-by-hop fashion 407 along the installed Reverse Route. 409 * If that address is not an address in the Destination Address 410 Set or in the Local Interface Set of the LOADng Router, 411 consider the RREQ as a candidate for forwarding. 413 o When an RREQ is considered a candidate for forwarding, retransmit 414 it according to the flooding operation, specified for the network. 416 o Upon receiving an RREP, insert or refresh a tuple in the Routing 417 Set, recording a route towards the originator address from the 418 RREP, as well as to the neighbor LOADng Router, from which that 419 RREP was received. This will install the Forward Route (towards 420 the originator address from the RREP). The originator address is 421 either an address from the Local Interface Set of the LOADng 422 Router, or an address from its Destination Address Set (i.e., an 423 address of a host attached to that LOADng Router). 425 o Upon receiving an RREP, forward it, as unicast, to the recorded 426 next hop along the corresponding Reverse Route until the RREP 427 reaches the LOADng Router that has the destination address from 428 the RREP in its Local Interface Set or Destination Address Set. 430 o When forwarding an RREQ or RREP, update the route metric, as 431 contained in that RREQ or RREP message. 433 A LOADng Router generating an RREQ specifies which metric type it 434 desires. Routers receiving an RREQ will process it and update route 435 metric information in the RREQ according to that metric, if they can. 436 All LOADng Routers, however, will update information in the RREQ so 437 as to be able to support a "hop-count" default metric. If a LOADng 438 Router is not able to understand the metric type, specified in an 439 RREQ, it will update the route metric value to its maximum value, so 440 as to ensure that this is indicated to the further recipients of the 441 RREQ. Once the route metric value is set to its maximum value, no 442 LOADng Router along the path towards the destination may change the 443 value. 445 4.2. LOADng Routers and LOADng Interfaces 447 A LOADng Router has a set of at least one, and possibly more, LOADng 448 Interfaces. Each LOADng Interface: 450 o Is configured with one or more addresses. 452 o Has a number of interface parameters. 454 In addition to a set of LOADng Interfaces as described above, each 455 LOADng Router: 457 o Has a number of router parameters. 459 o Has an Information Base. 461 o Generates and processes RREQ, RREP, RREP_ACK and RERR messages, 462 according to this specification. 464 4.3. Information Base Overview 466 Necessary protocol state is recorded by way of five information sets: 467 the "Routing Set", the "Local Interface Set", the "Blacklisted 468 Neighbor Set", the "Destination Address Set", and the "Pending 469 Acknowledgment Set". 471 The Routing Set contains tuples, each representing the next-hop on, 472 and the metric of, a route towards a destination address. 473 Additionally, the Routing Set records the sequence number of the last 474 message, received from the destination. This information is 475 extracted from the message (RREQ or RREP) that generated the tuple so 476 as to enable routing. The routing table is to be updated using this 477 Routing Set. (A LOADng Router may choose to use any or all 478 destination addresses in the Routing Set to update the routing table, 479 this selection is outside the scope of this specification.) 481 The Local Interface Set contains tuples, each representing a local 482 LOADng Interface of the LOADng Router. Each tuple contains a list of 483 one or more addresses of that LOADng Interface. 485 The Blacklisted Neighbor Set contains tuples representing neighbor 486 LOADng Interface addresses of a LOADng Router with which 487 unidirectional connectivity has been recently detected. 489 The Destination Address Set contains tuples representing addresses, 490 for which the LOADng Router is responsible, i.e., addresses of this 491 LOADng Router, or of hosts and networks directly attached to this 492 LOADng Router and which use it to connect to the routing domain. 493 These addresses may in particular belong to devices which do not 494 implement LOADng, and thus cannot process LOADng messages. A LOADng 495 Router provides connectivity to these addresses by generating RREPs 496 in response to RREQs directed towards them. 498 The Pending Acknowledgment Set contains tuples, representing 499 transmitted RREPs for which an RREP_ACK is expected, but where this 500 RREP_ACK has not yet been received. 502 The Routing Set, the Blacklisted Neighbor Set and the Pending 503 Acknowledgment Set are updated by this protocol. The Local Interface 504 Set and the Destination Address Set are used, but not updated by this 505 protocol. 507 4.4. Signaling Overview 509 This protocol generates and processes the following routing messages: 511 Route Request (RREQ) - Generated by a LOADng Router when it has a 512 data packet to deliver to a given destination, where the data 513 packet source is local to that LOADng Router (i.e., is an address 514 in the Local Interface Set or Destination Address Set of that 515 LOADng Router), but where it does not have an available tuple in 516 its Routing Set indicating a route to that destination. An RREQ 517 contains: 519 * The (destination) address to which a Forward Route is to be 520 discovered by way of soliciting the LOADng Router with that 521 destination address in its Local Interface Set or in its 522 Destination Address Set to generate an RREP. 524 * The (originator) address for which a Reverse Route is to be 525 installed by RREQ forwarding and processing, i.e., the source 526 address of the data packet which triggered the RREQ generation. 528 * The sequence number of the LOADng Router, generating the RREQ. 530 An RREQ is flooded through the network, according to the flooding 531 operation specified for the network. 533 Route Reply (RREP) - Generated as a response to an RREQ by the 534 LOADng Router which has the address (destination) from the RREQ in 535 its Local Interface Set or in its Destination Address Set. An RREP 536 is sent in unicast towards the originator of that RREQ. An RREP 537 contains: 539 * The (originator) address to which a Forward Route is to be 540 installed when forwarding the RREP. 542 * The (destination) address towards which the RREP is to be sent. 543 More precisely, the destination address determines the unicast 544 route which the RREP follows. 546 * The sequence number of the LOADng Router, generating the RREP. 548 Route Reply Acknowledgment (RREP_ACK) - Generated by a LOADng Router 549 as a response to an RREP, in order to signal to the neighbor that 550 transmitted the RREP that the RREP was successfully received. 551 Receipt of an RREP_ACK indicates that the link between these two 552 neighboring LOADng Routers is bidirectional. An RREP_ACK is 553 unicast to the neighbor from which the RREP has arrived, and is 554 not forwarded. RREP_ACKs are generated only in response to an 555 RREP which, by way of a flag, has explicitly indicated that an 556 RREP_ACK is desired. 558 Route Error (RERR) - Generated by a LOADng Router when a link on an 559 active route to a destination is detected as broken by way of 560 inability to forward a data packet towards that destination. An 561 RERR is unicast to the source of the undeliverable data packet. 563 5. Protocol Parameters 565 The following parameters and constants are used in this 566 specification. 568 5.1. Protocol and Port Numbers 570 When using LOADng as an IP routing protocol, the considerations of 571 [RFC5498] apply. 573 5.2. Router Parameters 575 NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME - is the maximum time that a packet is expected 576 to take when traversing from one end of the network to the other. 578 RREQ_RETRIES - is the maximum number of subsequent RREQs that a 579 particular LOADng Router may generate in order to discover a route 580 to a destination, before declaring that destination unreachable. 582 RREQ_MIN_INTERVAL - is the minimal interval (in milliseconds) of 583 RREQs that a particular LOADng Router is allowed to send. 585 R_HOLD_TIME - is the minimum time a Routing Tuple SHOULD be kept in 586 the Routing Set after it was last refreshed. 588 MAX_DIST - is the value representing the maximum possible metric 589 (R_metric field). 591 B_HOLD_TIME - is the time during which the link between the neighbor 592 LOADng Router and this LOADng Router MUST be considered as non- 593 bidirectional, and that therefore RREQs received from that 594 neighbor LOADng Router MUST be ignored during that time 595 (B_HOLD_TIME). B_HOLD_TIME should be greater than 2 x 596 NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME x RREQ_RETRIES, to ensure that subsequent RREQs 597 will reach the destination via a route, excluding the link to the 598 blacklisted neighbor. 600 MAX_HOP_LIMIT - is the maximum limit of the number of hops that 601 LOADng routing messages are allowed to traverse. 603 5.3. Interface Parameters 605 Different LOADng Interfaces (on the same or on different LOADng 606 Routers) MAY employ different interface parameter values and MAY 607 change their interface parameter values dynamically. A particular 608 case is where all LOADng Interfaces on all LOADng Routers within a 609 given LOADng routing domain employ the same set of interface 610 parameter values. 612 RREQ_MAX_JITTER - is the default value of MAXJITTER used in 613 [RFC5148] for RREQ messages forwarded by this LOADng Router on 614 this interface. 616 RREP_ACK_REQUIRED - is a boolean flag, which indicates (if set) that 617 the LOADng Router is configured to expect that each RREP it sends 618 be confirmed by an RREP_ACK, or, (if cleared) that no RREP_ACK is 619 expected for this interface. 621 USE_BIDIRECTIONAL_LINK_ONLY - is a boolean flag, which indicates if 622 the LOADng Router only uses verified bi-directional links for data 623 packet forwarding on this interface. It is set by default. If 624 cleared, then the LOADng Router can use links which have not been 625 verified to be bi-directional on this interface. 627 RREP_ACK_TIMEOUT - is the minimum amount of time after transmission 628 of an RREP, that a LOADng Router SHOULD wait for an RREP_ACK from 629 a neighbor LOADng Router, before considering the link to this 630 neighbor to be unidirectional. 632 5.4. Constants 634 MAX_HOP_COUNT - is the maximum number of hops as representable by 635 the encoding that is used (e.g., 255 when using [RFC5444]). It 636 SHOULD NOT be used to limit the scope of a message; the router 637 parameter MAX_HOP_LIMIT can be used to limit the scope of a LOADng 638 routing message. 640 6. Protocol Message Content 642 The protocol messages, generated and processed by LOADng, are 643 described in this section using the notational conventions described 644 in Section 2. The encoding of messages for transmission by way of 645 [RFC5444] packets/messages is described in Appendix A, and Appendix B 646 illustrates the bit layout of a selection of LOADng control messages. 647 Unless stated otherwise, the message fields described below are set 648 by the LOADng Router that generates the message, and MUST NOT be 649 changed by intermediate LOADng Routers. 651 6.1. Route Request (RREQ) Messages 653 A Route Request (RREQ) message has the following fields: 655 RREQ.addr-length is an unsigned integer field, encoding the length 656 of the originator and destination addresses as follows: 658 RREQ.addr-length := the length of an address in octets - 1 660 RREQ.seq-num is an unsigned integer field, containing the sequence 661 number (see Section 8) of the LOADng Router, generating the RREQ 662 message. 664 RREQ.metric-type is an unsigned integer field and specifies the type 665 of metric requested by this RREQ. 667 RREQ.route-metric is a unsigned integer field, of length defined by 668 RREQ.metric-type, which specifies the route metric of the route 669 (the sum of the link metrics of the links), through which this 670 RREQ has traveled. 672 RREQ.hop-count is an unsigned integer field and specifies the total 673 number of hops which the message has traversed from the 674 RREQ.originator. 676 RREQ.hop-limit is an unsigned integer field and specifies the number 677 of hops that the message is allowed to traverse. 679 RREQ.originator is an identifier of RREQ.addr-length + 1 octets, 680 specifying the address of the LOADng Interface over which this 681 RREQ was generated, and to which a route (the "reverse route") is 682 supplied by this RREQ. In case the message is generated by a 683 LOADng Router on behalf of an attached host, RREQ.originator 684 corresponds to an address of that host, otherwise it corresponds 685 to an address of the sending LOADng Interface of the LOADng 686 Router. 688 RREQ.destination is an identifier of RREQ.addr-length + 1 octets, 689 specifying the address to which the RREQ should be sent, i.e., the 690 destination address for which a route is sought. 692 The following fields of an RREQ message are immutable, i.e., they 693 MUST NOT be changed during processing or forwarding of the message: 694 RREQ.addr-length, RREQ.seq-num, RREQ.originator, and 695 RREQ.destination. 697 The following fields of an RREQ message are mutable, i.e., they will 698 be changed by intermediate routers during processing or forwarding, 699 as specified in Section 12.2 and Section 12.3: RREQ.metric-type, 700 RREQ.route-metric, RREQ.hop-limit, and RREQ.hop-count. 702 Any additional field that is added to the message by an extension to 703 this protocol, e.g., by way of TLVs, MUST be considered immutable, 704 unless the extension specifically defines the field as mutable. 706 6.2. Route Reply (RREP) Messages 708 A Route Reply (RREP) message has the following fields: 710 RREP.addr-length is an unsigned integer field, encoding the length 711 of the originator and destination addresses as follows: 713 RREP.addr-length := the length of an address in octets - 1 715 RREP.seq-num is an unsigned integer field, containing the sequence 716 number (see Section 8) of the LOADng Router, generating the RREP 717 message. 719 RREP.metric-type is an unsigned integer field and specifies the type 720 of metric, requested by this RREP. 722 RREP.route-metric is a unsigned integer field, of length defined by 723 RREP.metric-type, which specifies the route metric of the route 724 (the sum of the link metrics of the links) through which this RREP 725 has traveled. 727 RREP.ackrequired is a boolean flag which, when set ('1'), at least 728 one RREP_ACK MUST be generated by the recipient of an RREP if the 729 RREP is successfully processed. When cleared ('0'), an RREP_ACK 730 MUST NOT be generated in response to processing of the RREP. 732 RREP.hop-count is an unsigned integer field and specifies the total 733 number of hops which the message has traversed from 734 RREP.originator to RREP.destination. 736 RREP.hop-limit is an unsigned integer field and specifies the number 737 of hops that the message is allowed to traverse. 739 RREP.originator is an identifier of RREP.addr-length + 1 octets, 740 specifying the address for which this RREP was generated, and to 741 which a route (the "forward route") is supplied by this RREP. In 742 case the message is generated on a LOADng Router on behalf of an 743 attached host, RREP.originator corresponds to an address of that 744 host, otherwise it corresponds to an address of the LOADng 745 Interface of the LOADng Router, over which the RREP was generated. 747 RREP.destination is an identifier of RREP.addr-length + 1 octets, 748 specifying the address to which the RREP should be sent. (I.e., 749 this address is equivalent to RREQ.originator of the RREQ that 750 triggered the RREP.) 752 The following fields of an RREP message are immutable, i.e., they 753 MUST NOT be changed during processing or forwarding of the message: 754 RREP.addr-length, RREP.seq-num, RREP.originator, and 755 RREP.destination. 757 The following fields of an RREP message are mutable, i.e., they will 758 be changed by intermediate routers during processing or forwarding, 759 as specified in Section 13.2 and Section 13.3: RREP.metric-type, 760 RREP.route-metric, RREP.ackrequired, RREP.hop-limit, and RREP.hop- 761 count. 763 Any additional field that is added to the message by an extension to 764 this protocol, e.g., by way of TLVs, MUST be considered immutable, 765 unless the extension specifically defines the field as mutable. 767 6.3. Route Reply Acknowledgement (RREP_ACK) Messages 769 A Route Reply Acknowledgement (RREP_ACK) message has the following 770 fields: 772 RREP_ACK.addr-length is an unsigned integer field, encoding the 773 length of the destination and originator addresses as follows: 775 RREP_ACK.addr-length := the length of an address in octets - 1 777 RREP_ACK.seq-num is an unsigned integer field and contains the value 778 of RREP.seq-num from the RREP for which this RREP_ACK is sent. 780 RREP_ACK.destination is an identifier of RREP_ACK.addr-length + 1 781 octets and contains the value of the RREP.originator field from 782 the RREP for which this RREP_ACK is sent. 784 RREP_ACK messages are sent only across a single link and are never 785 forwarded. 787 6.4. Route Error (RERR) Messages 789 A Route Error (RERR) message has the following fields: 791 RERR.addr-length is an unsigned integer field, encoding the length 792 of RERR.destination and RERR.unreachableAddress, as follows: 794 RERR.addr-length := the length of an address in octets - 1 796 RERR.errorcode is an unsigned integer field and specifies the reason 797 for the error message being generated, according to Table 1. 799 RERR.unreachableAddress is an identifier of RERR.addr-length + 1 800 octets, specifying an address, which has become unreachable, and 801 for which an error is reported by way of this RERR message. 803 RERR.originator is an identifier of RERR.addr-length + 1 octets, 804 specifying the address of the LOADng Interface over which this 805 RERR was generated by a LOADng Router. 807 RERR.destination is an identifier of RERR.address-length + 1 octets, 808 specifying the destination address of this RERR message. 809 RERR.destination is, in general, the source address of a data 810 packet, for which delivery to RERR.unreachableAddress failed, and 811 the unicast destination of the RERR message is the LOADng Router 812 which has RERR.destination listed in a Local Interface Tuple or in 813 a Destination Address Tuple. 815 RERR.hop-limit is an unsigned integer field and specifies the number 816 of hops that the message is allowed to traverse. 818 The following fields of an RERR message are immutable, i.e., they 819 MUST NOT be changed during processing or forwarding of the message: 820 RERR.addr-length, RERR.errorcode, RERR.unreachableAddress, 821 RERR.originator and RERR.destination. 823 The following fields of an RERR message are mutable, i.e., they will 824 be changed by intermediate routers during processing or forwarding, 825 as specified in Section 14.3 and Section 14.4: RERR.hop-limit. 827 Any additional field that is added to the message by an extension to 828 this protocol, e.g., by way of TLVs, MUST be considered immutable, 829 unless the extension specifically defines the field as mutable. 831 7. Information Base 833 Each LOADng Router maintains an Information Base, containing the 834 information sets necessary for protocol operation, as described in 835 the following sections. The organization of information into these 836 information sets is non-normative, given so as to facilitate 837 description of message generation, forwarding and processing rules in 838 this specification. An implementation may choose any representation 839 or structure for when maintaining this information. 841 7.1. Routing Set 843 The Routing Set records the next hop on the route to each known 844 destination, when such a route is known. It consists of Routing 845 Tuples: 847 (R_dest_addr, R_next_addr, R_metric, R_metric_type, R_hop_count, 848 R_seq_num, R_bidirectional, R_local_iface_addr, R_valid_time) 850 where: 852 R_dest_addr - is the address of the destination, either an address 853 of a LOADng Interface of a destination LOADng Router, or an 854 address of an interface reachable via the destination LOADng 855 Router, but which is outside the routing domain. 857 R_next_addr - is the address of the "next hop" on the selected route 858 to the destination. 860 R_metric - is the metric associated with the selected route to the 861 destination with address R_dest_addr. 863 R_metric_type - specifies the metric type for this Routing Tuple - 864 in other words, how R_metric is defined and calculated. 866 R_hop_count - is the hop count of the selected route to the 867 destination with address R_dest_addr. 869 R_seq_num - is the value of the RREQ.seq-num or RREP.seq-num field 870 of the RREQ or RREP which installed or last updated this tuple. 871 For the Routing Tuples installed by previous hop information of 872 RREQ or RREP, R_seq_num MUST be set to -1. 874 R_bidirectional - is a boolean flag, which specifies if the Routing 875 Tuple is verified as representing a bi-directional route. Data 876 traffic SHOULD only be routed through a routing tuple with 877 R_bidirectional flag equals TRUE, unless the LOADng Router is 878 configured as accepting routes without bi-directionality 879 verification explicitly by setting USE_BIDIRECTIONAL_LINK_ONLY to 880 FALSE of the interface with R_local_iface_address. 882 R_local_iface_addr - is an address of the local LOADng Interface, 883 through which the destination can be reached. 885 R_valid_time - specifies the time until which the information 886 recorded in this Routing Tuple is considered valid. 888 7.2. Local Interface Set 890 A LOADng Router's Local Interface Set records its local LOADng 891 Interfaces. It consists of Local Interface Tuples, one per LOADng 892 Interface: 894 (I_local_iface_addr_list) 896 where: 898 I_local_iface_addr_list - is an unordered list of the network 899 addresses of this LOADng Interface. 901 The implementation MUST initialize the Local Interface Set with at 902 least one tuple containing at least one address of an LOADng 903 Interface. The Local Interface Set MUST be updated if there is a 904 change of the LOADng Interfaces of a LOADng Router (i.e., a LOADng 905 Interface is added, removed or changes addresses). 907 7.3. Blacklisted Neighbor Set 909 The Blacklisted Neighbor Set records the neighbor LOADng Interface 910 addresses of a LOADng Router, with which connectivity has been 911 detected to be unidirectional. Specifically, the Blacklisted 912 Neighbor Set records neighbors from which an RREQ has been received 913 (i.e., through which a Forward Route would possible) but to which it 914 has been determined that it is not possible to communicate (i.e., 915 forwarding Route Replies via this neighbor fails, rendering 916 installing the Forward Route impossible). It consists of Blacklisted 917 Neighbor Tuples: 919 (B_neighbor_address, B_valid_time) 921 where: 923 B_neighbor_address - is the address of the blacklisted neighbor 924 LOADng Interface. 926 B_valid_time - specifies the time until which the information 927 recorded in this tuple is considered valid. 929 7.4. Destination Address Set 931 The Destination Address Set records addresses, for which a LOADng 932 Router will generate RREPs in response to received RREQs, in addition 933 to its own LOADng Interface addresses (as listed in the Local 934 Interface Set). The Destination Address Set thus represents those 935 destinations (i.e., hosts), for which this LOADng Router is providing 936 connectivity. It consists of Destination Address Tuples: 938 (D_address) 940 where: 942 D_address - is the address of a destination (a host or a network), 943 attached to this LOADng Router and for which this LOADng Router 944 provides connectivity through the routing domain. 946 The Destination Address Set is used for generating signaling, but is 947 not itself updated by signaling specified in this document. Updates 948 to the Destination Address Set are due to changes of the environment 949 of a LOADng Router - hosts or external networks being connected to or 950 disconnected from a LOADng Router. The Destination Address Set may 951 be administrationally provisioned, or provisioned by external 952 protocols. 954 7.5. Pending Acknowledgment Set 956 The Pending Acknowledgment Set contains information about RREPs which 957 have been transmitted with the RREP.ackrequired flag set, and for 958 which an RREP_ACK has not yet been received. It consists of Pending 959 Acknowledgment Tuples: 961 (P_next_hop, P_originator, P_seq_num, 962 P_ack_received, P_ack_timeout) 964 where: 966 P_next_hop - is the address of the neighbor LOADng Interface to 967 which the RREP was sent. 969 P_originator - is the address of the originator of the RREP. 971 P_seq_num - is the RREP.seq-num field of the sent RREP. 973 P_ack_received - is a boolean flag, which specifies the tuple has 974 been acknowledged by a corresponding RREP_ACK message. The 975 default value is FALSE. 977 P_ack_timeout - is the time after which the tuple MUST be expired. 979 8. LOADng Router Sequence Numbers 981 Each LOADng Router maintains a single sequence number, which must be 982 included in each RREQ or RREP message it generates. Each LOADng 983 Router MUST make sure that no two messages (both RREQ and RREP) are 984 generated with the same sequence number, and MUST generate sequence 985 numbers such that these are monotonically increasing. This sequence 986 number is used as information for when comparing routes to the LOADng 987 Router having generated the message. 989 However, with a limited number of bits for representing sequence 990 numbers, wrap-around (that the sequence number is incremented from 991 the maximum possible value to zero) can occur. To prevent this from 992 interfering with the operation of the protocol, the following MUST be 993 observed. The term MAXVALUE designates in the following the largest 994 possible value for a sequence number. The sequence number S1 is said 995 to be "greater than" (denoted '>') the sequence number S2 if: 997 S2 < S1 AND S1 - S2 <= MAXVALUE/2 OR 999 S1 < S2 AND S2 - S1 > MAXVALUE/2 1001 9. Route Maintenance 1003 Tuples in the Routing Set are maintained by way of five different 1004 mechanisms: 1006 o RREQ/RREP exchange, specified in Section 12 and Section 13. 1008 o Data traffic delivery success. 1010 o Data traffic delivery failure. 1012 o External signals indicating that a tuple in the Routing Set needs 1013 updating. 1015 o Information expiration. 1017 Routing Tuples in the Routing Set contain a validity time, which 1018 specifies the time until which the information recorded in this tuple 1019 is considered valid. After this time, the information in such tuples 1020 is to be considered as invalid, for the processing specified in this 1021 document. 1023 Routing Tuples for actively used routes (i.e., routes via which 1024 traffic is currently transiting) SHOULD NOT be removed, unless there 1025 is evidence that they no longer provide connectivity - i.e., unless a 1026 link on that route has broken. 1028 To this end, one or more of the following mechanisms (non-exhaustive 1029 list) MAY be used: 1031 o If a lower layer mechanism provides signals, such as when delivery 1032 to a presumed neighbor LOADng Router fails, this signal MAY be 1033 used to indicate that a link has broken, trigger early expiration 1034 of a Routing Tuple from the Routing Set, and to initiate Route 1035 Error Signaling (see Section 14). Conversely, absence of such a 1036 signal when attempting delivery MAY be interpreted as validation 1037 that the corresponding Routing Tuple(s) are valid, and their 1038 R_valid_time refreshed correspondingly. Note that when using such 1039 a mechanism, care should be taken to prevent that an intermittent 1040 error (e.g., an incidental wireless collision) triggers corrective 1041 action and signaling. This depends on the nature of the signals, 1042 provided by the lower layer, but can include the use of a 1043 hysteresis function or other statistical mechanisms. 1045 o Conversely, for each successful delivery of a packet to a neighbor 1046 or a destination, if signaled by a lower layer or a transport 1047 mechanism, or each positive confirmation of the presence of a 1048 neighbor by way of an external neighbor discovery protocol, MAY be 1049 interpreted as validation that the corresponding Routing Tuple(s) 1050 are valid, and their R_valid_time refreshed correspondingly. Note 1051 that when refreshing a Routing Tuple corresponding to a 1052 destination of a data packet, the Routing Tuple corresponding to 1053 the next hop toward that destination SHOULD also be refreshed. 1055 Furthermore, a LOADng Router may experience that a route currently 1056 used for forwarding data packets is no longer operational, and must 1057 act to either rectify this situation locally (Section 13) or signal 1058 this situation to the source of the data packets for which delivery 1059 was unsuccessful (Section 14). 1061 If a LOADng Router fails to deliver a data packet to a next-hop, it 1062 MUST generate an RERR message, as specified in Section 14. 1064 10. Unidirectional Link Handling 1066 Each LOADng Router MUST monitor the bidirectionality of the links to 1067 its neighbors and set the R_bidirectional flag of related routing 1068 tuples when processing Route Replies (RREP). To this end, one or 1069 more of the following mechanisms MAY be used (non exhaustive list): 1071 o If a lower layer mechanism provides signals, such as when delivery 1072 to a presumed neighbor LOADng Router fails, this signal MAY be 1073 used to detect that a link to this neighbor is broken or is 1074 unidirectional; the LOADng Router MUST then blacklist the neighbor 1075 (see Section 10.1). 1077 o If a mechanism such as NDP [RFC4861] is available, the LOADng 1078 Router MAY use it. 1080 o A LOADng Router MAY use a neighborhood discovery mechanism with 1081 bidirectionality verification, such as NHDP [RFC6130]. 1083 o RREP_ACK message exchange, as described in Section 15. 1085 o Upper-layer mechanisms, such as transport-layer acknowledgments, 1086 MAY be used to detect unidirectional or broken links. 1088 When a LOADng Router detects, via one of these mechanisms, that a 1089 link to a neighbor LOADng Router is unidirectional or broken, the 1090 LOADng Router MUST blacklist this neighbor (see Section 10.1). 1091 Conversely, if a LOADng Router detects via one of these mechanisms 1092 that a previously blacklisted LOADng Router has a bidirectional link 1093 to this LOADng Router, it MAY remove it from the blacklist before the 1094 B_valid_time of the corresponding tuple. 1096 10.1. Blacklist Usage 1098 The Blacklist is maintained according to Section 7.3. When an 1099 interface of neighbor LOADng Router is detected to have a 1100 unidirectional link to the LOADng Router, it is blacklisted, i.e., a 1101 tuple (B_neighbor_address, B_valid_time) is created thus: 1103 o B_neighbor_address := the address of the blacklisted neighbor 1104 LOADng Router interface 1106 o B_valid_time := current_time + B_HOLD_TIME 1108 When a neighbor LOADng Router interface is blacklisted, i.e., when 1109 there is a corresponding (B_neighbor_address, B_valid_time) tuple in 1110 the Blacklisted Neighbor Set, it is temporarily not considered as a 1111 neighbor, and thus: 1113 o Every RREQ received from this neighbor LOADng Router interface 1114 MUST be discarded; 1116 11. Common Rules for RREQ and RREP Messages 1118 RREQ and RREP messages, both, supply routes between their recipients 1119 and the originator of the RREQ or RREP message. The two message 1120 types therefore share common processing rules, and differ only in the 1121 following: 1123 o RREQ messages are multicast or broadcast, intended to be received 1124 by all LOADng Routers in the network, whereas RREP messages are 1125 all unicast, intended to be received only by LOADng Routers on a 1126 specific route towards a specific destination. 1128 o Receipt of an RREQ message by a LOADng router, which has the 1129 RREQ.destination address in its Local Interface Set or Destination 1130 Address Set MUST trigger the procedures for generation of an RREP 1131 message. 1133 o Receipt of an RREP message with RREP.ackrequired set MUST trigger 1134 generation of an RREP_ACK message. 1136 For the purpose of the processing description in this section, the 1137 following additional notation is used: 1139 received-route-metric is a variable, representing the route metric, 1140 as included in the received RREQ or RREP message, see Section 16. 1142 used-metric-type is a variable, representing the type of metric used 1143 for calculating received-route-metric, see Section 16. 1145 previous-hop is the address of the LOADng Router, from which the 1146 RREQ or RREP message was received. 1148 > is the comparison operator for sequence numbers, as specified in 1149 Section 8. 1151 MSG is a shorthand for either an RREQ or RREP message, used for when 1152 accessing message fields in the description of the common RREQ and 1153 RREP message processing in the following subsections. 1155 hop-count is a variable, representing the hop-count, as included in 1156 the received RREQ or RREP message. 1158 hop-limit is a variable, representing the hop-limit, as included in 1159 the received RREQ or RREP message. 1161 link-metric is a variable, representing the link metric between this 1162 LOADng Router and the LOADng Router from which the RREQ or RREP 1163 message was received, as calculated by the receiving LOADng 1164 Router, see Section 16. 1166 route-metric is a variable, representing the route metric, as 1167 included in the received RREQ or RREP message, plus the link- 1168 metric for the link, over which the RREQ or RREP was received, 1169 i.e., the total route cost from the originator to this LOADng 1170 Router. 1172 11.1. Identifying Invalid RREQ or RREP Messages 1174 A received RREQ or RREP message is invalid, and MUST be discarded 1175 without further processing, if any of the following conditions are 1176 true: 1178 o The address length specified by this message (i.e., MSG.addr- 1179 length + 1) differs from the length of the address(es) of this 1180 LOADng Router. 1182 o The address contained in MSG.originator is an address of this 1183 LOADng Router. 1185 o There is a tuple in the Routing Set where: 1187 * R_dest_addr = MSG.originator 1189 * R_seq_num > MSG.seq-num 1191 o For RREQ messages only, an RREQ MUST be considered invalid if the 1192 previous-hop is blacklisted (i.e., its address is in a tuple in 1193 the Blacklisted Neighbor Set, see Section 10.1). 1195 A LOADng Router MAY recognize additional reasons for identifying that 1196 an RREQ or RREP message is invalid for processing, e.g., to allow a 1197 security protocol to perform verification of integrity check values 1198 and prevent processing of unverifiable RREQ or RREP message by this 1199 protocol. 1201 11.2. RREQ and RREP Message Processing 1203 A received, and valid, RREQ or RREP message is processed as follows: 1205 1. Included TLVs are processed/updated according to their 1206 specification. 1208 2. Set the variable hop-count to MSG.hop-count + 1. 1210 3. Set the variable hop-limit to MSG.hop-limit - 1. 1212 4. If MSG.metric-type is known to this LOADng Router, and if 1213 MSG.metric-type is not HOP_COUNT, then: 1215 * Set the variable used-metric-type to the value of MSG.metric- 1216 type. 1218 * Determine the link metric over the link over which the message 1219 was received, according to used-metric-type, and set the 1220 variable link-metric to the calculated value. 1222 * Compute the route metric to MSG.originator according to used- 1223 metric-type by adding link-metric to the received-route-metric 1224 advertised by the received message, and set the variable 1225 route-metric to the calculated value. 1227 5. Otherwise: 1229 * Set the variable used-metric-type to HOP_COUNT. 1231 * Set the variable route-metric to MAX_DIST, see Section 16. 1233 * Set the variable link-metric to MAX_DIST. 1235 6. Find the Routing Tuple (henceforth, Matching Routing Tuple) 1236 where: 1238 * R_dest_addr = MSG.originator 1240 7. If no Matching Routing Tuple is found, then create a new Matching 1241 Routing Tuple (the "reverse route" for RREQ messages or "forward 1242 route" for RREP messages) with: 1244 * R_dest_addr := MSG.originator 1246 * R_next_addr := previous-hop 1248 * R_metric_type := used-metric-type 1250 * R_metric := MAX_DIST 1251 * R_hop_count := hop-count 1253 * R_seq_num := -1 1255 * R_valid_time := current time + R_HOLD_TIME 1257 * R_bidirectional := FALSE 1259 * R_local_iface_addr := the address of the LOADng Interface 1260 through which the message was received. 1262 8. The Matching Routing Tuple, existing or new, is compared to the 1263 received RREQ or RREP message: 1265 1. If 1267 + R_seq_num = MSG.seq-num; AND 1269 + R_metric_type = used-metric-type; AND 1271 + R_metric > route-metric 1273 OR 1275 + R_seq_num = MSG.seq-num; AND 1277 + R_metric_type = used-metric-type; AND 1279 + R_metric = route-metric; AND 1281 + R_hop_count > hop-count 1283 OR 1285 + R_seq_num = MSG.seq-num; AND 1287 + R_metric_type does not equal to used-metric-type; AND 1289 + R_metric_type = HOP_COUNT 1291 OR 1293 + R_seq_num < MSG.seq-num 1295 Then: 1297 12. The message is used for updating the Routing Set. The 1298 Routing Tuple, where: 1300 - R_dest_addr = MSG.originator; 1302 is updated thus: 1304 - R_next_addr := previous-hop 1306 - R_metric_type = used-metric-type 1308 - R_metric := route-metric 1310 - R_hop_count := hop-count 1312 - R_seq_num := MSG.seq-num 1314 - R_valid_time := current time + R_HOLD_TIME 1316 - R_bidirectional := TRUE, if the message being 1317 processed is an RREP. 1319 13. If previous-hop is not equal to MSG.originator, and if 1320 there is no Matching Routing Tuple in the Routing Set 1321 with R_dest_addr = previous-hop, create a new Matching 1322 Routing Tuple with: 1324 - R_dest_addr := previous-hop 1326 - R_next_addr := previous-hop 1328 14. The Routing Tuple with R_dest_addr = previous-hop, 1329 existing or new, is updated as follows 1331 - R_metric_type := used-metric-type 1333 - R_metric := link-metric 1335 - R_hop_count := 1 1337 - R_seq_num := -1 1339 - R_valid_time := current time + R_HOLD_TIME 1341 - R_bidirectional := TRUE, if the processed message is 1342 an RREP, otherwise FALSE. 1344 - R_local_iface_addr := the address of the LOADng 1345 Interface through which the message was received. 1347 2. Otherwise, if the message is an RREQ, it is not processed 1348 further and is not considered for forwarding. If it is an 1349 RREP and if RREP.ackrequired is set, an RREP_ACK message MUST 1350 be sent to the previous-hop, according to Section 15.2. The 1351 RREP is not considered for forwarding. 1353 12. Route Requests (RREQs) 1355 Route Requests (RREQs) are generated by a LOADng Router when it has 1356 data packets to deliver to a destination, where the data packet 1357 source is local to that LOADng Router (i.e., is an address in the 1358 Local Interface Set or Destination Address Set of that LOADng 1359 Router), but for which the LOADng router has no matching tuple in the 1360 Routing Set. Furthermore, if there is a matching tuple in the Routing 1361 Set with the R_bidirectional set to FALSE, and the parameter 1362 USE_BIDIRECTIONAL_LINK_ONLY of the interface with 1363 R_local_iface_address equals TRUE, an RREQ MUST be generated. 1365 After originating an RREQ, a LOADng Router waits for a corresponding 1366 RREP. If no such RREP is received within 2*NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME 1367 milliseconds, the LOADng Router MAY issue a new RREQ for the sought 1368 destination (with an incremented seq_num) up to a maximum of 1369 RREQ_RETRIES times. Two consequent RREQs generated on an interface 1370 of a LOADng Router SHOULD be separated at least RREQ_MIN_INTERVAL. 1372 12.1. RREQ Generation 1374 An RREQ message is generated according to Section 6 with the 1375 following content: 1377 o RREQ.addr-length set to the length of the address, as specified in 1378 Section 6; 1380 o RREQ.metric-type set to the desired metric type; 1382 o RREQ.route-metric := 0. 1384 o RREQ.seq-num set to the next unused sequence number, maintained by 1385 this LOADng Router; 1387 o RREQ.hop-count := 0; 1389 o RREQ.hop-limit := MAX_HOP_LIMIT; 1391 o RREQ.destination := the address to which a route is sought; 1393 o RREQ.originator := one address of the LOADng Interface of the 1394 LOADng Router that generates the RREQ. If the LOADng Router is 1395 generating RREQ on behalf of a host connected to this LOADng 1396 Router, the source address of the data packet, generated by that 1397 host, is used; 1399 12.2. RREQ Processing 1401 The variables hop-count and hop-limit have been updated in 1402 Section 11.2 (when processing the message) and are used in this 1403 section. On receiving an RREQ message, a LOADng Router MUST process 1404 the message according to this section: 1406 1. If the message is invalid for processing, as defined in 1407 Section 11.1, the message MUST be discarded without further 1408 processing. The message is not considered for forwarding. 1410 2. Otherwise, the message is processed according to Section 11.2. 1412 3. If RREQ.destination is listed in I_local_iface_addr_list of any 1413 Local Interface Tuple, or corresponds to D_address of any 1414 Destination Address Tuple of this LOADng Router, the RREP 1415 generation process in Section 13.1 MUST be applied. The RREQ is 1416 not considered for forwarding. 1418 4. Otherwise, if hop-count is less than MAX_HOP_COUNT and hop-limit 1419 is greater than 0, the message is considered for forwarding 1420 according to Section 12.3. 1422 12.3. RREQ Forwarding 1424 The variables used-metric type, hop-count, hop-limit and route-metric 1425 have been updated in Section 11.2 (when processing the message) and 1426 are used in this section to update the content of the message to be 1427 forwarded. An RREQ, considered for forwarding, MUST be updated as 1428 follows, prior to it being transmitted: 1430 1. RREQ.metric-type := used-metric-type (as set in Section 11.2) 1432 2. RREQ.route-metric := route-metric (as set in Section 11.2) 1434 3. RREQ.hop-count := hop-count (as set in Section 11.2) 1436 4. RREQ.hop-limit := hop-limit (as set in Section 11.2) 1438 An RREQ MUST be forwarded according to the flooding operation, 1439 specified for the network. This MAY be by way of classic flooding, a 1440 reduced relay set mechanism such as [RFC6621], or any other 1441 information diffusion mechanism such as [RFC6206]. Care must be 1442 taken that NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME is chosen so as to accommodate for the 1443 maximum time that may take for an RREQ to traverse the network, 1444 accounting for in-router delays incurring due to or imposed by such 1445 algorithms. 1447 12.4. RREQ Transmission 1449 RREQs, whether initially generated or forwarded, are sent to all 1450 neighbor LOADng Routers through all interfaces in the Local Interface 1451 Set. 1453 When an RREQ is transmitted, all receiving LOADng Routers will 1454 process the RREQ message and as a consequence consider the RREQ 1455 message for forwarding at the same, or at almost the same, time. If 1456 using data link and physical layers that are subject to packet loss 1457 due to collisions, such RREQ messages SHOULD be jittered as described 1458 in [RFC5148], using RREQ_MAX_JITTER, in order to avoid such losses. 1460 13. Route Replies (RREPs) 1462 Route Replies (RREPs) are generated by a LOADng Router in response to 1463 an RREQ (henceforth denoted "corresponding RREQ"), and are sent by 1464 the LOADng Router which has, in either its Destination Address Set or 1465 in its Local Interface Set, the address from RREQ.destination. RREPs 1466 are sent, hop by hop, in unicast towards the originator of the RREQ, 1467 in response to which the RREP was generated, along the Reverse Route 1468 installed by that RREQ. A LOADng Router, upon forwarding an RREP, 1469 installs the Forward Route towards the RREP.destination. 1471 Thus, with forwarding of RREQs installing the Reverse Route and 1472 forwarding of RREPs installing the Forward Route, bi-directional 1473 routes are provided between the RREQ.originator and RREQ.destination. 1475 13.1. RREP Generation 1477 At least one RREP MUST be generated in response to a (set of) 1478 received RREQ messages with identical (RREP.originator, RREP.seq- 1479 num). An RREP MAY be generated immediately as a response to each 1480 RREQ processed, in order to provide shortest possible route 1481 establishment delays, or MAY be generated after a certain delay after 1482 the arrival of the first RREQ, in order to use the "best" received 1483 RREQ (e.g., received over the lowest-cost route) but at the expense 1484 of longer route establishment delays. A LOADng Router MAY generate 1485 further RREPs for subsequent RREQs received with the same 1486 (RREP.originator, RREP.seq-num) pairs, if these indicate a better 1487 route, at the expense of additional control traffic being generated. 1488 In all cases, however, the content of an RREP is as follows: 1490 o RREP.addr-length set to the length of the address, as specified in 1491 Section 6; 1493 o RREP.seq-num set to the next unused sequence number, maintained by 1494 this LOADng Router; 1496 o RREP.metric-type set to the same value as the RREQ.metric-type in 1497 the corresponding RREQ if the metric type is known to the router. 1498 Otherwise, RREP.metric-type is set to HOP_COUNT; 1500 o RREP.route-metric := 0 1502 o RREP.hop-count := 0; 1504 o RREP.hop-limit := MAX_HOP_LIMIT; 1506 o RREP.destination := the address to which this RREP message is to 1507 be sent; this corresponds to the RREQ.originator from the RREQ 1508 message, in response to which this RREP message is generated; 1510 o RREP.originator := the address of the LOADng Router, generating 1511 the RREP. If the LOADng Router is generating an RREP on behalf of 1512 the hosts connected to it, or on behalf of one of the addresses 1513 contained in the LOADng Routers Destination Address Set, the host 1514 address is used. 1516 The RREP that is generated is transmitted according to Section 13.4. 1518 13.2. RREP Processing 1520 The variables hop-count and hop-limit have been updated in 1521 Section 11.2 (when processing the message) and are used in this 1522 section. On receiving an RREP message, a LOADng Router MUST process 1523 the message according to this section: 1525 1. If the message is invalid for processing, as defined in 1526 Section 11.1, the message MUST be discarded without further 1527 processing. The message is not considered for forwarding. 1529 2. Otherwise, the message is processed according to Section 11.2. 1531 3. If RREP.ackrequired is set, an RREP_ACK message MUST be sent to 1532 the previous-hop, according to Section 15.2. 1534 4. If hop-count is equal to MAX_HOP_COUNT or hop-limit is equal to 1535 0, the message is not considered for forwarding. 1537 5. Otherwise, if RREP.destination is not listed in 1538 I_local_iface_addr_list of any Local Interface Tuple and does not 1539 correspond to D_address of any Destination Address Tuple of this 1540 LOADng Router, the RREP message is considered for forwarding 1541 according to Section 13.3. 1543 13.3. RREP Forwarding 1545 The variables used-metric type, hop-count, hop-limit and route-metric 1546 have been updated in Section 11.2 (when processing the message) and 1547 are used in this section to update the content of the message to be 1548 forwarded. An RREP message, considered for forwarding, MUST be 1549 updated as follows, prior to it being transmitted: 1551 1. RREP.metric-type := used-metric-type (as set in Section 11.2) 1553 2. RREP.route-metric := route-metric (as set in Section 11.2) 1555 3. RREP.hop-count := hop-count (as set in Section 11.2) 1557 4. RREP.hop-limit := hop-limit (as set in Section 11.2) 1559 5. The RREP is transmitted, according to Section 13.4. 1561 The RREP message is then unicast to the next hop towards 1562 RREP.destination. 1564 13.4. RREP Transmission 1566 An RREP is, ultimately, destined for the LOADng Router which has the 1567 address listed in the RREP.destination field in either of its Local 1568 Interface Set, or in its Destination Address Set. The RREP is 1569 forwarded in unicast towards that LOADng Router. The RREP MUST, 1570 however, be transmitted so as to allow it to be processed in each 1571 intermediate LOADng Router to: 1573 o Install proper forward routes; AND 1575 o Permit that RREP.hop-count be updated to reflect the route. 1577 RREP Transmission is accomplished by the following procedure: 1579 1. Find the Routing Tuple (henceforth, the "Matching Routing Tuple") 1580 in the Routing Set, where: 1582 * R_dest_addr = RREP.destination 1584 2. Find the Local Interface Tuple (henceforth, "Matching Interface 1585 Tuple), where: 1587 * I_local_iface_addr_list contains R_local_iface_addr from the 1588 Matching Routing Tuple 1590 3. If RREP_ACK_REQUIRED is set for the LOADng Interface, identified 1591 by the Matching Interface Tuple: 1593 * Create a new Pending Acknowledgment Tuple with: 1595 + P_next_hop := R_next_addr from the Matching Routing Tuple 1597 + P_originator := RREP.originator 1599 + P_seq_num := RREP.seq-num 1601 + P_ack_received := FALSE 1603 + P_ack_timeout := current_time + RREP_ACK_TIMEOUT 1605 * RREP.ackrequired := TRUE 1607 4. Otherwise: 1609 * RREP.ackrequired := FALSE 1611 5. The RREP is transmitted over the LOADng Interface, identified by 1612 the Matching Interface Tuple to the neighbor LOADng Router, 1613 identified by R_next_addr from the Matching Routing Tuple. 1615 When a Pending Acknowledgement Tuple expires, if P_ack_received = 1616 FALSE, the P_next_hop address MUST be blacklisted by creating a 1617 Blacklisted Neighbor Tuple according to Section 7.3 1619 14. Route Errors (RERRs) 1621 If a LOADng Router fails to deliver a data packet to a next hop or a 1622 destination, and if neither the source nor destination address of 1623 that data packet belongs to the Destination Address Set of that 1624 LOADng Router, it MUST generate a Route Error (RERR). This RERR MUST 1625 be sent along the Reverse Route towards the source of the data packet 1626 for which delivery was unsuccessful (to the last LOADng Router along 1627 the Reverse Route, if the data packet was originated by a host behind 1628 that LOADng Router). 1630 The following definition is used in this section: 1632 o "EXPIRED" indicates that a timer is set to a value clearly 1633 preceding the current time (e.g., current time - 1). 1635 14.1. Identifying Invalid RERR Messages 1637 A received RERR is invalid, and MUST be discarded without further 1638 processing, if any of the following conditions are true: 1640 o The address length specified by this message (i.e., RERR.addr- 1641 length + 1) differs from the length of the address(es) of this 1642 LOADng Router. 1644 o The address contained in RERR.originator is an address of this 1645 LOADng Router. 1647 A LOADng Router MAY recognize additional reasons, external to this 1648 specification, for identifying that an RERR message is invalid for 1649 processing, e.g., to allow a security protocol to perform 1650 verification of signatures and prevent processing of unverifiable 1651 RERR message by this protocol. 1653 14.2. RERR Generation 1655 A packet with an RERR message is generated by the LOADng Router, 1656 detecting the link breakage, with the following content: 1658 o RERR.error-code := the error code corresponding to the event 1659 causing the RERR to be generated, from among those recorded in 1660 Table 1; 1662 o RERR.addr-length := the length of the address, as specified in 1663 Section 6; 1665 o RERR.unreachableAddress := the destination address from the 1666 unsuccessfully delivered data packet. 1668 o RERR.originator := one address of the LOADng Interface of the 1669 LOADng Router that generates the RERR. 1671 o RERR.destination := the source address from the unsuccessfully 1672 delivered data packet, towards which the RERR is to be sent. 1674 o RERR.hop-limit := MAX_HOP_LIMIT; 1676 14.3. RERR Processing 1678 For the purpose of the processing description below, the following 1679 additional notation is used: 1681 previous-hop is the address of the LOADng Router, from which the 1682 RERR was received. 1684 hop-limit is a variable, representing the hop-limit, as included in 1685 the received RERR message. 1687 Upon receiving an RERR, a LOADng Router MUST perform the following 1688 steps: 1690 1. If the RERR is invalid for processing, as defined in 1691 Section 14.1, the RERR MUST be discarded without further 1692 processing. The message is not considered for forwarding. 1694 2. Included TLVs are processed/updated according to their 1695 specification. 1697 3. Set the variable hop-limit to RERR.hop-limit - 1. 1699 4. Find the Routing Tuple (henceforth "matching Routing Tuple") in 1700 the Routing Set where: 1702 * R_dest_addr = RERR.unreachableAddress 1704 * R_next_addr = previous-hop 1706 5. If no matching Routing Tuple is found, the RERR is not processed 1707 further, but is considered for forwarding, as specified in 1708 Section 14.4. 1710 6. Otherwise, if one matching Routing Tuple is found: 1712 1. If RERR.errorcode is 0 ("No available route", as specified in 1713 Section 19.1), this matching Routing Tuple is updated as 1714 follows: 1716 + R_valid_time := EXPIRED 1718 Extensions to this specification MAY define additional error 1719 codes in the Error Code IANA registry, and MAY insert 1720 processing rules here for RERRs with that error code. 1722 2. If hop-limit is greater than 0, the RERR message is 1723 considered for forwarding, as specified in Section 14.4 1725 14.4. RERR Forwarding 1727 An RERR is, ultimately, destined for the LOADng Router which has, in 1728 either its Destination Address Set or in its Local Interface Set, the 1729 address from RERR.originator. 1731 An RERR, considered for forwarding is therefore processed as follows: 1733 1. RERR.hop-limit := hop-limit (as set in Section 14.3) 1735 2. Find the Destination Address Tuple (henceforth, matching 1736 Destination Address Tuple) in the Destination Address Set where: 1738 * D_address = RERR.destination 1740 3. If one or more matching Destination Address Tuples are found, the 1741 RERR message is discarded and not retransmitted, as it has 1742 reached the final destination. 1744 4. Otherwise, find the Local Interface Tuple (henceforth, matching 1745 Local Interface Tuple) in the Local Interface Set where: 1747 * I_local_iface_addr_list contains RERR.destination. 1749 5. If a matching Local Interface Tuple is found, the RERR message is 1750 discarded and not retransmitted, as it has reached the final 1751 destination. 1753 6. Otherwise, if no matching Destination Address Tuples or Local 1754 Interface Tuples are found, the RERR message is transmitted 1755 according to Section 14.5. 1757 14.5. RERR Transmission 1759 An RERR is, ultimately, destined for the LOADng Router which has the 1760 address listed in the RERR.destination field in either of its Local 1761 Interface Set, or in its Destination Address Set. The RERR is 1762 forwarded in unicast towards that LOADng Router. The RERR MUST, 1763 however, be transmitted so as to allow it to be processed in each 1764 intermediate LOADng Router to: 1766 o Allow intermediate LOADng Routers to update their Routing Sets, 1767 i.e., remove tuples for this destination. 1769 RERR Transmission is accomplished by the following procedure: 1771 1. Find the Routing Tuple (henceforth, the "Matching Routing Tuple") 1772 in the Routing Set, where: 1774 * R_dest_addr = RERR.destination 1776 2. Find the Local Interface Tuple (henceforth, "Matching Interface 1777 Tuple), where: 1779 * I_local_iface_addr_list contains R_local_iface_addr from the 1780 Matching Routing Tuple 1782 3. The RERR is transmitted over the LOADng Interface, identified by 1783 the Matching Interface Tuple to the neighbor LOADng Router, 1784 identified by R_next_addr from the Matching Routing Tuple. 1786 15. Route Reply Acknowledgments (RREP_ACKs) 1788 A LOADng Router MUST signal in a transmitted RREP that it is 1789 expecting an RREP_ACK, by setting RREP.ackrequired flag in the RREP. 1790 When doing so, the LOADng Router MUST also add a tuple (P_next_hop, 1791 P_originator, P_seq_num, P_ack_timeout) to the Pending Acknowledgment 1792 Set, and set P_ack_timeout to current_time + RREP_ACK_TIMEOUT, as 1793 described in Section 13.4. 1795 The following definition is used in this section: 1797 o "EXPIRED" indicates that a timer is set to a value clearly 1798 preceding the current time (e.g., current_time - 1). 1800 15.1. Identifying Invalid RREP_ACK Messages 1802 A received RREP_ACK is invalid, and MUST be discarded without further 1803 processing, if any of the following conditions are true: 1805 o The address length specified by this message (i.e., RREP_ACK.addr- 1806 length + 1) differs from the length of the address(es) of this 1807 LOADng Router. 1809 A LOADng Router MAY recognize additional reasons, external to this 1810 specification, for identifying that an RREP_ACK message is invalid 1811 for processing, e.g., to allow a security protocol to perform 1812 verification of signatures and prevent processing of unverifiable 1813 RREP_ACK message by this protocol. 1815 15.2. RREP_ACK Generation 1817 Upon reception of an RREP message with the RREP.ackrequired flag set, 1818 a LOADng Router MUST generate at least one RREP_ACK and send this 1819 RREP_ACK in unicast to the neighbor which originated the RREP. 1821 An RREP_ACK message is generated by a LOADng Router with the 1822 following content: 1824 o RREP_ACK.addr-length := the length of the address, as specified in 1825 Section 6; 1827 o RREP_ACK.seq-num := the value of the RREP.seq-num field of the 1828 received RREP; 1830 o RREP_ACK.destination := RREP.originator of the received RREP. 1832 15.3. RREP_ACK Processing 1834 On receiving an RREP_ACK from a LOADng neighbor LOADng Router, a 1835 LOADng Router MUST do the following: 1837 1. If the RREP_ACK is invalid for processing, as defined in 1838 Section 15.1, the RREP_ACK MUST be discarded without further 1839 processing. 1841 2. Find the Routing Tuple (henceforth, Matching Routing Tuple) 1842 where: 1844 * R_dest_addr = previous-hop; 1846 The Matching Routing Tuple is updated as follows: 1848 * R_bidirectional := TRUE 1850 3. If a Pending Acknowledgement Tuple (henceforth, Matching Pending 1851 Acknowledgement Tuple) exists, where: 1853 * P_next_hop is the address of the LOADng Router from which the 1854 RREP_ACK was received. 1856 * P_originator = RREP_ACK.destination 1858 * P_seq_num = RREP_ACK.seq-num 1860 Then the RREP has been acknowledged. The Matching Pending 1861 Acknowledgement Tuple is updated as follows: 1863 * P_ack_received := TRUE 1865 * P_ack_timeout := EXPIRED 1867 15.4. RREP_ACK Forwarding 1869 An RREP_ACK is intended only for a specific direct neighbor, and MUST 1870 NOT be forwarded. 1872 15.5. RREP_ACK Transmission 1874 An RREP_ACK is transmitted, in unicast, to the neighbor LOADng Router 1875 from which the RREP was received. 1877 16. Metrics 1879 This specification enables the use of different metrics for when 1880 calculating route metrics. 1882 Metrics as defined in LOADng are additive, and the routes that are to 1883 be created are those with the minimum sum of the metrics along that 1884 route. 1886 16.1. Specifying New Metrics 1888 When defining a metric, the following considerations SHOULD be taken 1889 into consideration: 1891 o The definition of the R_metric field, as well as the value of 1892 MAX_DIST. 1894 17. Implementation Status 1896 This section records the status of known implementations of the 1897 protocol defined by this specification, and is based on a proposal 1898 described in [I-D.sheffer-running-code]. According to 1899 [I-D.sheffer-running-code], "this will allow reviewers and working 1900 groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit 1901 of running code and potentially reward the documented protocols by 1902 treating the documents with implementations preferentially". 1904 In the following subsections, each publicly-known implementation of 1905 LOADng is listed. There are currently four publicly-known 1906 implementations of LOADng. These have been tested for 1907 interoperability in at least three interop events, as described in 1908 [I-D.loadng-interop-report]. 1910 17.1. Implementation of Ecole Polytechnique 1912 This implementation is developed by the Networking Group at Ecole 1913 Polytechnique. It can run over real network interfaces, and can also 1914 be integrated with the network simulator NS2. It is a Java 1915 implementation, and can be used on any platform that includes a Java 1916 virtual machine. 1918 The implementation has been maintained since the 00 revision of 1919 LOADng, and is quite mature. It has been tested in interoperability 1920 events with other implementations (as described in 1921 [I-D.loadng-interop-report]), and in large-scale network simulations 1922 with up to 1000 routers. There have been several scientific 1923 publications based on this implementation, such as [IEEE_VTC2012] 1924 [IEEE_WiCom2012] [IEEE_ICWITS2012]. 1926 All the protocol functions of this revision (-08) of the 1927 specification, including RREQ/RREP/RREP-ACK/RERR generation, 1928 processing, forwarding and transmission, as well as blacklisting, are 1929 implemented. 1931 The latest implementation conforms to the LOADng-07 revision as 1932 documented in this specification. This software is currently closed 1933 source. 1935 17.2. Implementation of Fujitsu Laboratories of America 1937 This implementation is developed by Fujitsu Laboratories of America. 1938 It is a Java implementation, structured in multiple separate modules, 1939 notably a [RFC5444] generator and parser, and integration module in 1940 the network simulator Ns-2, a kernel module for integrating the 1941 implementation in a Linux kernel (not yet completed), and the 1942 protocol core. 1944 The implementation is mature and has been tested both in 1945 interoperability tests with other implementations 1946 [I-D.loadng-interop-report], as well as large-scale simulations with 1947 hundreds of routers. The implementation is not currently used in 1948 deployments. The implementation supports all LOADng functions (RREQ, 1949 RREP, RREP-ACK generation, processing, forwarding and transmission), 1950 and conforms to the LOADng-06 specification. The software is 1951 currently closed source. 1953 17.3. Implementation of Hitachi Yokohama Research Laboratory - 1 1955 This implementation is developed by Hitachi, Ltd. Yokohama Research 1956 Laboratory. It can run over real embedded devices. It is a C 1957 implementation. The implementation is maintained since the 00 1958 revision of LOADng. It was tested in the first interoperability 1959 event with other implementations, as described in 1960 [I-D.loadng-interop-report]. 1962 This implementation is alpha version, mainly for performance test and 1963 evaluations. All the functions of the protocol, including RREQ/RREP/ 1964 RREP-ACK/RERR generation, processing, forwarding and transmission, 1965 blacklisting, have been implemented. Also a RFC5444 generator and 1966 parser have been implemented. The latest implementation conforms to 1967 LOADng-06 revision. This software is currently closed source. 1969 17.4. Implementation of Hitachi Yokohama Research Laboratory -2 1971 This implementation is developed by Hitachi, Ltd. Yokohama Research 1972 Laboratory. It can run over real network interface, and can also be 1973 integrated with network simulator NS2. It is a C++ implementation. 1975 The implementation is mature and maintained since the 00 revision of 1976 LOADng. It was tested in large-scale network simulations up to 500 1977 routers. 1979 All the functions of the protocol, including RREQ/RREP/RREP-ACK/RERR 1980 generation, processing, forwarding and transmission, blacklisting, 1981 have been implemented. The latest implementation conforms to the 1982 LOADng-05 revision. This software is currently closed source. 1984 18. Security Considerations 1986 Currently, this protocol does not specify any special security 1987 measures. As a reactive routing protocol, this protocol is a 1988 potential target for various attacks. Various possible 1989 vulnerabilities are discussed in this section. 1991 By way of (i) enabling inclusion of TLVs and (ii) permitting that 1992 LOADng recognizes external reasons for rejecting RREQ, RREP, RREP_ACK 1993 and RERR messages, development of security measures, appropriate for 1994 a given deployment, is however supported. This architecture is a 1995 result of the observation that with respect to security in LOADng 1996 routed networks, "one size rarely fits all". This, as LOADng 1997 deployment domains have varying security requirements ranging from 1998 "unbreakable" to "virtually none", depending on, e.g., physical 1999 access to the network, or on security available on other layers. The 2000 virtue of this approach is that LOADng routing protocol 2001 specifications (and implementations) can remain "generic", with 2002 extensions providing proper deployment-domain specific security 2003 mechanisms. 2005 18.1. Confidentiality 2007 This protocol floods Route Requests (RREQs) to all the LOADng Routers 2008 in the network, when there is traffic to deliver to a given 2009 destination. Hence, if used in an unprotected network (such as an 2010 unprotected wireless network): 2012 o Part of the network topology is revealed to anyone who listens, 2013 specifically (i) the identity (and existence) of the source LOADng 2014 Router; (ii) the identity of the destination; and (iii) the fact 2015 that a path exists between the source LOADng Router and the LOADng 2016 Router from which the RREQ was received. 2018 o The network traffic patterns are revealed to anyone who listens to 2019 the LOADng control traffic, specifically which pairs of devices 2020 communicate. If, for example, a majority of traffic originates 2021 from or terminates in a specific LOADng Router, this may indicate 2022 that this LOADng Router has a central role in the network. 2024 This protocol also unicasts Route Replies (RREPs) from the 2025 destination of an RREQ to the originator of that same RREQ. Hence, 2026 if used in an unprotected network (such as an unprotected wireless 2027 network): 2029 o Part of the network topology is revealed to anyone who is near or 2030 on the unicast path of the RREP (such as within radio range of 2031 LOADng Routers on the unicast path in an unprotected wireless 2032 network), specifically that a path from the originator (of the 2033 RREP) to the destination (of the RREP) exists. 2035 Finally, this protocol unicasts Route Errors (RERRs) when an 2036 intermediate LOADng Router detects that the path from a source to a 2037 destination is no longer available. Hence, if used in an unprotected 2038 network (such as an unprotected wireless network): 2040 o A disruption of the network topology is revealed to anyone who is 2041 near or on the unicast path of the RERR (such as within radio 2042 range of LOADng Routers on the unicast path in an unprotected 2043 wireless network), specifically that a path from the originator 2044 (of the RERR) to the destination (of the RERR) has been disrupted. 2046 This protocol signaling behavior enables, for example, an attacker to 2047 identify central devices in the network (by monitoring RREQs) so as 2048 to target an attack, and (by way of monitoring RERRs) to measure the 2049 success of an attack. 2051 18.2. Integrity 2053 A LOADng Router injects topological information into the network by 2054 way of transmitting RREQ and RREP messages, and removes installed 2055 topological information by way of transmitting RERR messages. If 2056 some LOADng Routers for some reason, malice or malfunction, inject 2057 invalid control traffic, network integrity may be compromised. 2058 Therefore, message authentication is recommended. 2060 Different such situations may occur, for instance: 2062 1. A LOADng Router generates RREQ messages, pretending to be another 2063 LOADng Router; 2065 2. A LOADng Router generates RREP messages, pretending to be another 2066 LOADng Router; 2068 3. A LOADng Router generates RERR messages, pretending to be another 2069 LOADng Router; 2071 4. A LOADng Router generates RERR messages, indicating that a link 2072 on a path to a destination is broken; 2074 5. A LOADng Router forwards altered control messages; 2076 6. A LOADng Router does not forward control messages; 2078 7. A LOADng Router forwards RREPs and RREQs, but does not forward 2079 unicast data traffic; 2081 8. A LOADng Router "replays" previously recorded control messages 2082 from another LOADng Router. 2084 Authentication of the originator LOADng Router for control messages 2085 (for situations 1, 2 and 3) and on individual links announced in the 2086 control message (for situation 2 and 4) may be used as a 2087 countermeasure. However, to prevent routers from repeating old (and 2088 correctly authenticated) information (situation 8), temporal 2089 information is required, requiring a router to positively identify 2090 such a delayed message. 2092 In general, integrity check values and other required security 2093 information may be transmitted as a separate Message Type, or 2094 signatures and security information may be transmitted within the 2095 control messages, using the TLV mechanism. Either option permits 2096 that "secured" and "unsecured" routers can coexist in the same 2097 network, if desired. 2099 Specifically, if LOADng is used on the IP layer, the authenticity of 2100 entire control messages can be established through employing IPsec 2101 authentication headers, whereas authenticity of individual links 2102 (situations 2 and 4) require additional security information to be 2103 distributed. 2105 18.3. Channel Jamming and State Explosion 2107 A reactive protocol, LOADng control messages are generated in 2108 response to network events. For RREQs, such an event is that a data 2109 packet is present in a router which does not have a route to the 2110 destination of the data packet, or that the router receives an RERR 2111 message, invalidating a route. For RREPs, such an event is the 2112 receipt of an RREQ corresponding to a destination owned by the LOADng 2113 Router. A router that forwards an RREQ records the reverse route 2114 state. A router that forwards an RREP records the forward route 2115 state. If some routers for some reason, malice or malfunction, 2116 generates excessive RREQ, RREP or RERRs, otherwise correctly 2117 functioning LOADng Routers may fall victim to either "indirect 2118 jamming" (being "tricked" into generating excessive control traffic) 2119 or an explosion in the state necessary for maintaining protocol state 2120 (potentially, exhausting the available memory resources). 2122 Different such situations may occur, for instance: 2124 1. A router, within a short time, generates RREQs to an excessive 2125 amount of destinations in the network (possibly all destinations, 2126 possibly even destinations not present in the network), causing 2127 intermediate routers to allocate state for the forward routes. 2129 2. A router generates excessively frequent RREQs to the same 2130 (existing) destination, causing the corresponding LOADng Router 2131 to generate excessive RREPs. 2133 3. A router generates RERRs for a destination to the source LOADng 2134 Router for traffic to that destination, causing that LOADng 2135 Router to flood renewed RREQs. 2137 For situation 1, the state required for recording forward and/or 2138 reverse routes may exceed the memory available in the intermediate 2139 LOADng Routers - to the detriment of being able of recording state 2140 for other routes. This, in particular, if a LOADng Router generates 2141 RREQs for destinations "not present in the network". 2143 A router which, within a short time, generates RREPs to an excessive 2144 amount of destinations in the network (possibly all destinations, 2145 possibly even destinations not present in the network), will not have 2146 the same network-wide effect: an intermediate router receiving an 2147 RREP for a destination for which no reverse route exists will neither 2148 attempt forwarding the RREP nor allocate state for the forward route. 2150 For situations 1, 2, and 3, a possible countermeasure is to rate- 2151 limit the number of control messages that a LOADng Router forwards on 2152 behalf of another LOADng Router. Such a rate limit should take into 2153 consideration the expected normal traffic for a given LOADng 2154 deployment. Authentication may furthermore be used so as to prohibit 2155 a LOADng Router from forwarding control traffic from any non- 2156 authenticated router (with the assumption being that an authenticated 2157 router is not expected to exhibit such rogue behavior). 2159 18.4. Interaction with External Routing Domains 2161 This protocol does provide a basic mechanism for a LOADng Router to 2162 be able to discover routes to external routing domains: a LOADng 2163 Router configured to "own" a given set of addresses will respond to 2164 RREQs for destinations with these addresses, and can - by whatever 2165 protocols governing the routing domain wherein these addresses exist 2166 - provide paths to these addresses. 2168 When operating routers connecting a LOADng domain to an external 2169 routing domain, destinations inside the LOADng domain can be injected 2170 into the external domain, if the routing protocol governing that 2171 domain so permits. Care MUST be taken to not allow potentially 2172 insecure and untrustworthy information to be injected into the 2173 external domain. 2175 In case LOADng is used on the IP layer, a RECOMMENDED way of 2176 extending connectivity from an external routing domain to a LOADng 2177 routed domain is to assign an IP prefix (under the authority of the 2178 routers/gateways connecting the LOADng routing domain with the 2179 external routing domain) exclusively to that LOADng routing domain, 2180 and to statically configure gateways to advertise routes for that 2181 prefix into the external domain. Within the LOADng domain, gateways 2182 SHOULD only generate RREPs for destinations which are not part of 2183 that prefix; this is in particularly important if a gateway otherwise 2184 provides connectivity to "a default route". 2186 19. LOADng Specific IANA Considerations 2188 19.1. Error Codes 2190 IANA is requested to create a new registry for Error Codes, with 2191 initial assignments and allocation policies as specified in Table 1. 2193 +---------+--------------------+-------------------+ 2194 | Code | Description | Allocation Policy | 2195 +---------+--------------------+-------------------+ 2196 | 0 | No available route | | 2197 | 1-251 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2198 | 252-255 | Unassigned | Experimental Use | 2199 +---------+--------------------+-------------------+ 2200 Table 1: Error Codes 2202 20. Contributors 2204 This specification is the result of the joint efforts of the 2205 following contributors - listed alphabetically. 2207 o Alberto Camacho, LIX, France, 2209 o Thomas Heide Clausen, LIX, France, 2211 o Axel Colin de Verdiere, LIX, France, 2213 o Kenneth Garey, Maxim Integrated Products, USA, 2214 2216 o Ulrich Herberg, Fujitsu Laboratories of America, USA 2217 2219 o Yuichi Igarashi, Hitachi Ltd, Yokohama Research Laboratory, Japan, 2220 2222 o Cedric Lavenu, EDF R&D, France, 2224 o Afshin Niktash, Maxim Integrated Products, USA, 2225 2227 o Charles E. Perkins, Futurewei Inc, USA, 2229 o Hiroki Satoh, Hitachi Ltd, Yokohama Research Laboratory, Japan, 2230 2232 o Thierry Lys, ERDF, France, 2234 o Jiazi Yi, LIX, France, 2236 21. Acknowledgments 2238 The authors would like to acknowledge the team behind AODV [RFC3561]. 2239 The authors would also like to acknowledge the efforts of K. Kim 2240 (picosNet Corp/Ajou University), S. Daniel Park (Samsung 2241 Electronics), G. Montenegro (Microsoft Corporation), S. Yoo (Ajou 2242 University) and N. Kushalnagar (Intel Corp.) for their work on an 2243 initial version of a specification, from which this protocol is 2244 derived. 2246 22. References 2247 22.1. Normative References 2249 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs 2250 to Indicate Requirement Levels", 2251 RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997. 2253 [RFC5444] Clausen, T., Dean, J., Dearlove, C., and 2254 C. Adjih, "Generalized Mobile Ad Hoc 2255 Network (MANET) Packet/Message Format", 2256 RFC 5444, February 2009. 2258 [RFC5498] Chakeres, I., "IANA Allocations for 2259 Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) 2260 Protocols", RFC 5498, March 2009. 2262 22.2. Informative References 2264 [I-D.sheffer-running-code] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving 2265 "Rough Consensus" with Running Code", 2266 draft-sheffer-running-code-01 (work in 2267 progress), December 2012. 2269 [I-D.loadng-interop-report] Clausen, T., Camacho, A., Yi, J., Colin 2270 de Verdiere, A., Igarashi, Y., Satoh, 2271 H., Morii, Y., Heropberg, U., and C. 2272 Lavenu, "Interoperability Report for the 2273 Lightweight On-demand Ad hoc Distance- 2274 vector Routing Protocol - Next 2275 Generation (LOADng)", draft-lavenu-lln- 2276 loadng-interoperability-report-04 (work 2277 in progress), December 2012. 2279 [RFC3561] Perkins, C., Belding-Royer, E., and S. 2280 Das, "Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector 2281 (AODV) Routing", RFC 3561, July 2003. 2283 [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., 2284 and H. Soliman, "Neighbor Discovery for 2285 IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, 2286 September 2007. 2288 [RFC4944] Montenegro, G., Kushalnagar, N., Hui, 2289 J., and D. Culler, "Transmission of IPv6 2290 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4 Networks", 2291 RFC 4944, September 2007. 2293 [RFC5148] Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., and B. 2294 Adamson, "Jitter Considerations in 2295 Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs)", 2296 RFC 5148, February 2008. 2298 [RFC6130] Clausen, T., Dean, J., and C. Dearlove, 2299 "MANET Neighborhood Discovery Protocol 2300 (NHDP)", RFC 6130, April 2011. 2302 [RFC6206] Levis, P., Clausen, T., Gnawali, O., and 2303 J. Ko, "The Trickle Algorithm", 2304 RFC 6206, March 2011. 2306 [RFC6621] Macker, J., "Simplified Multicast 2307 Forwarding", RFC 6621, May 2012. 2309 [EUI64] IEEE, "Guidelines for 64-bit Global 2310 Identifier (EUI-64) Registration 2311 Authority". 2313 [IEEE754-2008] IEEE, "IEEE 754-2008: IEEE Standard for 2314 Floating-Point Arithmetic", 2008. 2316 [IEEE_VTC2012] Clausen, T., Yi, J., and A. Coline de 2317 Verdiere, "Towards AODV Version 2", 2318 Proceedings of IEEE VTC 2012 Fall, IEEE 2319 76th Vehicular Technology Conference, 2320 2012. 2322 [IEEE_WiCom2012] Yi, J., Clausen, T., and A. Coline de 2323 Verdiere, "Efficient Data Acquisition in 2324 Sensor Networks:Introducing (the) LOADng 2325 Collection Tree Protocol", 2326 Proceedings of IEEE WiCom 2012, The 8th 2327 IEEE International Conference on 2328 Wireless Communications, Networking and 2329 Mobile Computing., 2012. 2331 [IEEE_ICWITS2012] Yi, J., Clausen, T., and A. Bas, "Smart 2332 Route Request for On-demand Route 2333 Discovery in Constrained Environments", 2334 Proceedings of IEEE ICWITS 2012, IEEE 2335 International Conference on Wireless 2336 Information Technology and Systems., 2337 2012. 2339 Appendix A. LOADng Control Messages using RFC5444 2341 This section presents how the abstract LOADng messages, used 2342 throughout this specification, are mapped into [RFC5444] messages. 2344 A.1. RREQ-Specific Message Encoding Considerations 2346 This protocol defines, and hence owns, the RREQ Message Type. Thus, 2347 as specified in [RFC5444], this protocol generates and transmits all 2348 RREQ messages, receives all RREQ messages and is responsible for 2349 determining whether and how each RREQ message is to be processed 2350 (updating the Information Base) and/or forwarded, according to this 2351 specification. Table 2 specifies how RREQ messages are mapped into 2352 [RFC5444]-elements. 2354 +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ 2355 | RREQ Element | RFC5444-Element | Considerations | 2356 +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ 2357 | RREQ.addr-length | | Supports addresses from | 2358 | | | 1-16 octets | 2359 | RREQ.seq-num | | 16 bits, hence MAXVALUE | 2360 | | | (Section 8) is 65535. | 2361 | | | MUST be included | 2362 | RREQ.metric-type | METRIC Message | Encoded by way of the | 2363 | | TLV | Type-Extension of a | 2364 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2365 | | | Message TLV of type | 2366 | | | METRIC, defined in | 2367 | | | Table 8. A LOADng Router | 2368 | | | generating an RREQ (as | 2369 | | | specified in | 2370 | | | Section 12.1) when using | 2371 | | | the HOP_COUNT metric, | 2372 | | | MUST NOT add the METRIC | 2373 | | | Message TLV to the RREQ | 2374 | | | (in order to reduce | 2375 | | | overhead, as the hop | 2376 | | | count value is already | 2377 | | | encoded in | 2378 | | | RREQ.hop-count). LOADng | 2379 | | | Routers receiving an RREQ | 2380 | | | without METRIC Message | 2381 | | | TLV assume that | 2382 | | | RREQ.metric-type is | 2383 | | | HOP_COUNT, and MUST not | 2384 | | | add the METRIC Message | 2385 | | | TLV when forwarding the | 2386 | | | message. Otherwise, | 2387 | | | exactly one METRIC TLV | 2388 | | | MUST be included in each | 2389 | | | RREQ message. | 2390 | RREQ.route-metric | METRIC Message | Encoded as the value | 2391 | | TLV value | field of the METRIC TLV. | 2392 | | | (LOADng Routers | 2393 | | | generating RREQs when | 2394 | | | using the HOP_COUNT | 2395 | | | metric do not need need | 2396 | | | to add the METRIC Message | 2397 | | | TLV, as specified above | 2398 | | | for the RREQ.metric-type | 2399 | | | field.) | 2400 | RREQ.hop-limit | | 8 bits. MUST be included | 2401 | | | in an RREQ message | 2402 | RREQ.hop-count | | 8 bits, hence | 2403 | | | MAX_HOP_COUNT is 255. | 2404 | | | MUST be included in an | 2405 | | | RREQ message. | 2406 | RREQ.originator | | MUST be included in an | 2407 | | | RREQ message. | 2408 | RREQ.destination | Address in | Encoded by way of an | 2409 | | Address-Block | address in an address | 2410 | | w/TLV | block, with which a | 2411 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2412 | | | Address Block TLV of type | 2413 | | | ADDR-TYPE and with | 2414 | | | Type-Extension | 2415 | | | DESTINATION is | 2416 | | | associated, defined in | 2417 | | | Table 9. An RREQ MUST | 2418 | | | contain exactly one | 2419 | | | address with a TLV of | 2420 | | | type ADDR-TYPE and with | 2421 | | | Type-Extension | 2422 | | | DESTINATION associated. | 2423 +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ 2425 Table 2: RREQ Message Elements 2427 A.2. RREP-Specific Message Encoding Considerations 2429 This protocol defines, and hence owns, the RREP Message Type. Thus, 2430 as specified in [RFC5444], this protocol generates and transmits all 2431 RREP messages, receives all RREP messages and is responsible for 2432 determining whether and how each RREP message is to be processed 2433 (updating the Information Base) and/or forwarded, according to this 2434 specification. Table 3 describes how RREP messages are mapped into 2435 [RFC5444]-elements. 2437 +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ 2438 | RREP Element | RFC5444-Element | Considerations | 2439 +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ 2440 | RREP.addr-length | | Supports addresses from | 2441 | | | 1-16 octets | 2442 | RREP.seq-num | | 16 bits, hence MAXVALUE | 2443 | | | (Section 8) is 65535. | 2444 | | | MUST be included | 2445 | RREP.metric-type | METRIC Message | Encoded by way of the | 2446 | | TLV | Type-Extension of a | 2447 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2448 | | | Message TLV of type | 2449 | | | METRIC, defined in | 2450 | | | Table 12. A LOADng Router | 2451 | | | generating an RREP (as | 2452 | | | specified in | 2453 | | | Section 13.1) when using | 2454 | | | the HOP_COUNT metric, | 2455 | | | MUST NOT add the METRIC | 2456 | | | Message TLV to the RREP | 2457 | | | (in order to reduce | 2458 | | | overhead, as the hop | 2459 | | | count value is already | 2460 | | | encoded in | 2461 | | | RREP.hop-count). LOADng | 2462 | | | Routers receiving an RREP | 2463 | | | without METRIC Message | 2464 | | | TLV assume that | 2465 | | | RREP.metric-type is | 2466 | | | HOP_COUNT, and MUST not | 2467 | | | add the METRIC Message | 2468 | | | TLV when forwarding the | 2469 | | | message. Otherwise, | 2470 | | | exactly one METRIC TLV | 2471 | | | MUST be included in each | 2472 | | | RREP message. | 2473 | RREP.route-metric | METRIC Message | Encoded as the value | 2474 | | TLV value | field of the METRIC TLV. | 2475 | | | (LOADng Routers | 2476 | | | generating RREPs when | 2477 | | | using the HOP_COUNT | 2478 | | | metric do not need need | 2479 | | | to add the METRIC Message | 2480 | | | TLV, as specified above | 2481 | | | for the RREP.metric-type | 2482 | | | field.) | 2483 | RREP.ackrequired | FLAGS Message TLV | Encoded by way of a | 2484 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2485 | | | Message TLV of type | 2486 | | | FLAGS, defined in | 2487 | | | Table 13. A TLV of type | 2488 | | | FLAGS MUST always be | 2489 | | | included in an RREP | 2490 | | | message. | 2491 | RREP.hop-limit | | 8 bits. MUST be included | 2492 | | | in an RREQ message | 2493 | RREP.hop-count | | 8 bits, hence | 2494 | | | MAX_HOP_COUNT is 255. | 2495 | | | MUST be included in an | 2496 | | | RREP message. | 2497 | RREP.originator | | MUST be included in an | 2498 | | | RREP message. | 2499 | RREP.destination | Address in | Encoded by way of an | 2500 | | Address-Block | address in an address | 2501 | | w/TLV | block, with which a | 2502 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2503 | | | Address Block TLV of type | 2504 | | | ADDR-TYPE and with | 2505 | | | Type-Extension | 2506 | | | DESTINATION is | 2507 | | | associated, defined in | 2508 | | | Table 14. An RREP MUST | 2509 | | | contain exactly one | 2510 | | | address with a TLV of | 2511 | | | type ADDR-TYPE and with | 2512 | | | Type-Extension | 2513 | | | DESTINATION associated. | 2514 +-------------------+-------------------+---------------------------+ 2516 Table 3: RREP Message Elements 2518 A.3. RREP_ACK Message Encoding 2520 This protocol defines, and hence owns, the RREP_ACK Message Type. 2521 Thus, as specified in [RFC5444], this protocol generates and 2522 transmits all RREP_ACK messages, receives all RREP_ACK messages and 2523 is responsible for determining whether and how each RREP_ACK message 2524 is to be processed (updating the Information Base), according to this 2525 specification. Table 4 describes how RREP_ACK Messages are mapped 2526 into [RFC5444]-elements. 2528 +----------------------+-------------------+------------------------+ 2529 | RREP_ACK Element | RFC5444-Element | Considerations | 2530 +----------------------+-------------------+------------------------+ 2531 | RREP_ACK.addr-length | | Supports addresses | 2532 | | | from 1-16 octets | 2533 | RREP_ACK.seq-num | | 16 bits, hence | 2534 | | | MAXVALUE (Section 8) | 2535 | | | is 65535. MUST be | 2536 | | | included | 2537 | RREP_ACK.destination | Address in | Encoded by way of an | 2538 | | Address-Block | address in an address | 2539 | | w/TLV | block, with which a | 2540 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2541 | | | Address Block TLV of | 2542 | | | type ADDR-TYPE and | 2543 | | | with Type-Extension | 2544 | | | DESTINATION is | 2545 | | | associated, defined in | 2546 | | | Table 17. An RREP_ACK | 2547 | | | MUST contain exactly | 2548 | | | one address with a TLV | 2549 | | | of type ADDR-TYPE and | 2550 | | | with Type-Extension | 2551 | | | DESTINATION | 2552 | | | associated. | 2553 +----------------------+-------------------+------------------------+ 2555 Table 4: RREP_ACK Message Elements 2557 A.4. RERR Message Encoding 2559 This protocol defines, and hence owns, the RERR Message Type. Thus, 2560 as specified in [RFC5444], this protocol generates and transmits all 2561 RERR messages, receives all RERR messages and is responsible for 2562 determining whether and how each RERR message is to be processed 2563 (updating the Information Base) and/or forwarded, according to this 2564 specification. Table 5 describes how RERR Messages are mapped into 2565 [RFC5444]-elements. 2567 +------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+ 2568 | RERR Element | RFC5444-Element | Considerations | 2569 +------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+ 2570 | RERR.addr-length | | from 1-16 octets | 2572 | RERR.hop-limit | | 8 bits. MUST be | 2573 | | | included in an RREQ | 2574 | | | message | 2575 | RERR.errorcode | Address Block | According to | 2576 | | TLV Value | Section 19.1. | 2577 | RERR.unreachableAddres | Address in | Encoded by way of an | 2578 | s | Address-Block | address in an address | 2579 | | w/TLV | block, with which a | 2580 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2581 | | | Address Block TLV of | 2582 | | | type ADDR-TYPE and | 2583 | | | with Type-Extension | 2584 | | | ERRORCODE is | 2585 | | | associated, defined | 2586 | | | in Table 20. | 2587 | RERR.originator | | MUST be included in | 2588 | | | an RERR message. | 2589 | RERR.destination | Address in | Encoded by way of an | 2590 | | Address-Block | address in an address | 2591 | | w/TLV | block, with which a | 2592 | | | Message-Type-specific | 2593 | | | Address Block TLV of | 2594 | | | type ADDR-TYPE and | 2595 | | | with Type-Extension | 2596 | | | DESTINATION is | 2597 | | | associated, defined | 2598 | | | in Table 20. An RERR | 2599 | | | MUST contain exactly | 2600 | | | one address with a | 2601 | | | TLV of type ADDR-TYPE | 2602 | | | and with | 2603 | | | Type-Extension | 2604 | | | DESTINATION | 2605 | | | associated. | 2606 +------------------------+------------------+-----------------------+ 2608 Table 5: RERR Message Elements 2610 A.5. RFC5444-Specific IANA Considerations 2612 This specification defines four Message Types, which must be 2613 allocated from the "Message Types" repository of [RFC5444], two 2614 Message TLV Types, which must be allocated from the "Message TLV 2615 Types" repository of [RFC5444], and four Address Block TLV Types, 2616 which must be allocated from the "Address Block TLV Types" repository 2617 of [RFC5444]. 2619 A.5.1. Expert Review: Evaluation Guidelines 2621 For the registries where an Expert Review is required, the designated 2622 expert should take the same general recommendations into 2623 consideration as are specified by [RFC5444]. 2625 A.5.2. Message Types 2627 This specification defines four Message Type, to be allocated from 2628 the 0-223 range of the "Message Types" namespace defined in 2629 [RFC5444], as specified in Table 6. 2631 +------+-----------------------------------------------+ 2632 | Type | Description | 2633 +------+-----------------------------------------------+ 2634 | TBD1 | RREQ: Route Request Message | 2635 | TBD1 | RREP: Route Reply Message | 2636 | TBD1 | RREP_ACK: Route Reply Acknowledgement Message | 2637 | TBD1 | RERR: Route Error Message | 2638 +------+-----------------------------------------------+ 2640 Table 6: Message Type assignment 2642 A.6. RREQ Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries 2644 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2645 Message TLVs for RREQ messages, in accordance with Section 6.2.1 of 2646 [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation policies as 2647 specified in Table 7. 2649 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2650 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2651 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2652 | 128 | METRIC | | 2653 | 129-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2654 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2656 Table 7: RREQ Message-Type-specific Message TLV Types 2658 Allocation of the METRIC TLV from the RREQ Message-Type-specific 2659 Message TLV Types in Table 7 will create a new Type Extension 2660 registry, with assignments as specified in Table 8. 2662 +--------+------+-----------+------------------------+--------------+ 2663 | Name | Type | Type | Description | Allocation | 2664 | | | Extension | | Policy | 2665 +--------+------+-----------+------------------------+--------------+ 2666 | METRIC | 128 | 0 | HOP_COUNT: | | 2667 | | | | MSG.hop-count is used | | 2668 | | | | instead of the METRIC | | 2669 | | | | TLV Value. MAX_DIST is | | 2670 | | | | 255. | | 2671 | METRIC | 128 | 1 | DIMENSIONLESS: A | | 2672 | | | | 32-bit, dimensionless, | | 2673 | | | | additive metric, | | 2674 | | | | single precision | | 2675 | | | | float, formatted | | 2676 | | | | according to | | 2677 | | | | [IEEE754-2008]. | | 2678 | METRIC | 128 | 2-251 | Unassigned | Expert | 2679 | | | | | Review | 2680 | METRIC | 128 | 252-255 | Unassigned | Experimental | 2681 +--------+------+-----------+------------------------+--------------+ 2683 Table 8: Message TLV Type assignment: METRIC 2685 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2686 Address Block TLVs for RREQ messages, in accordance with Section 2687 6.2.1 of [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation 2688 policies as specified in Table 9. 2690 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2691 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2692 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2693 | 128 | ADDR-TYPE | Expert Review | 2694 | 129-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2695 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2697 Table 9: RREQ Message-Type-specific Address Block TLV Types 2699 Allocation of the ADDR-TYPE TLV from the RREQ Message-Type-specific 2700 Address Block TLV Types in Table 9 will create a new Type Extension 2701 registry, with assignments as specified in Table 10. 2703 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2704 | Name | Type | Type Extension | Description | Allocation | 2705 | | | | | Policy | 2706 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2707 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 0 | DESTINATION | | 2708 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 2-255 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2709 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2710 Table 10: Address Block TLV Type assignment: ADDR-TYPE 2712 A.7. RREP Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries 2714 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2715 Message TLVs for RREP messages, in accordance with Section 6.2.1 of 2716 [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation policies as 2717 specified in Table 11. 2719 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2720 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2721 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2722 | 128 | METRIC | | 2723 | 129 | FLAGS | | 2724 | 130-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2725 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2727 Table 11: RREP Message-Type-specific Message TLV Types 2729 Allocation of the METRIC TLV from the RREP Message-Type-specific 2730 Message TLV Types in Table 11 will create a new Type Extension 2731 registry, with assignments as specified in Table 12. 2733 +--------+------+-----------+------------------------+--------------+ 2734 | Name | Type | Type | Description | Allocation | 2735 | | | Extension | | Policy | 2736 +--------+------+-----------+------------------------+--------------+ 2737 | METRIC | 128 | 0 | HOP_COUNT: | | 2738 | | | | MSG.hop-count is used | | 2739 | | | | instead of the METRIC | | 2740 | | | | TLV Value. MAX_DIST is | | 2741 | | | | 255. | | 2742 | METRIC | 128 | 1 | DIMENSIONLESS: A | | 2743 | | | | 32-bit, dimensionless, | | 2744 | | | | additive metric, | | 2745 | | | | single precision | | 2746 | | | | float, formatted | | 2747 | | | | according to | | 2748 | | | | [IEEE754-2008]. | | 2749 | METRIC | 128 | 2-251 | Unassigned | Expert | 2750 | | | | | Review | 2751 | METRIC | 128 | 252-255 | Unassigned | Experimental | 2752 +--------+------+-----------+------------------------+--------------+ 2754 Table 12: Message TLV Type assignment: METRIC 2756 Allocation of the FLAGS TLV from the RREP Message-Type-specific 2757 Message TLV Types in Table 11 will create a new Type Extension 2758 registry, with assignments as specified in Table 13. 2760 +-------+------+-----------+---------------------------+------------+ 2761 | Name | Type | Type | Description | Allocation | 2762 | | | Extension | | Policy | 2763 +-------+------+-----------+---------------------------+------------+ 2764 | FLAGS | 129 | 0 | Bit 0 represents the | | 2765 | | | | ackrequired flag (i.e., | | 2766 | | | | ackrequired is TRUE when | | 2767 | | | | bit 0 is set to 1 and | | 2768 | | | | FALSE when bit 0 is 0.). | | 2769 | | | | All other bits are | | 2770 | | | | reserved for future use. | | 2771 | FLAGS | 129 | 1-255 | Unassigned | Expert | 2772 | | | | | Review | 2773 +-------+------+-----------+---------------------------+------------+ 2775 Table 13: Message TLV Type assignment: FLAGS 2777 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2778 Address Block TLVs for RREP messages, in accordance with Section 2779 6.2.1 of [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation 2780 policies as specified in Table 14. 2782 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2783 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2784 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2785 | 128 | ADDR-TYPE | Expert Review | 2786 | 129-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2787 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2789 Table 14: RREP Message-Type-specific Address Block TLV Types 2791 Allocation of the ADDR-TYPE TLV from the RREP Message-Type-specific 2792 Address Block TLV Types in Table 14 will create a new Type Extension 2793 registry, with assignments as specified in Table 15. 2795 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2796 | Name | Type | Type Extension | Description | Allocation | 2797 | | | | | Policy | 2798 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2799 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 0 | DESTINATION | | 2800 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 1-255 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2801 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2803 Table 15: Address Block TLV Type assignment: ADDR-TYPE 2805 A.8. RREP_ACK Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries 2807 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2808 Message TLVs for RREP_ACK messages, in accordance with Section 6.2.1 2809 of [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation policies as 2810 specified in Table 16. 2812 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2813 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2814 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2815 | 128-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2816 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2818 Table 16: RREP_ACK Message-Type-specific Message TLV Types 2820 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2821 Address Block TLVs for RREP_ACK messages, in accordance with Section 2822 6.2.1 of [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation 2823 policies as specified in Table 17. 2825 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2826 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2827 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2828 | 128 | ADDR-TYPE | Expert Review | 2829 | 129-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2830 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2832 Table 17: RREP_ACK Message-Type-specific Address Block TLV Types 2834 Allocation of the ADDR-TYPE TLV from the RREP_ACK Message-Type- 2835 specific Address Block TLV Types in Table 17 will create a new Type 2836 Extension registry, with assignments as specified in Table 18. 2838 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2839 | Name | Type | Type Extension | Description | Allocation | 2840 | | | | | Policy | 2841 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2842 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 0 | DESTINATION | | 2843 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 2-255 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2844 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2846 Table 18: Address Block TLV Type assignment: ADDR-TYPE 2848 A.9. RERR Message-Type-Specific TLV Type Registries 2850 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2851 Message TLVs for RERR messages, in accordance with Section 6.2.1 of 2852 [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation policies as 2853 specified in Table 19. 2855 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2856 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2857 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2858 | 128-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2859 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2861 Table 19: RERR Message-Type-specific Message TLV Types 2863 IANA is requested to create a registry for Message-Type-specific 2864 Address Block TLVs for RERR messages, in accordance with Section 2865 6.2.1 of [RFC5444], and with initial assignments and allocation 2866 policies as specified in Table 20. 2868 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2869 | Type | Description | Allocation Policy | 2870 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2871 | 128 | ADDR-TYPE | Expert Review | 2872 | 129-223 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2873 +---------+-------------+-------------------+ 2875 Table 20: RREP_ACK Message-Type-specific Address Block TLV Types 2877 Allocation of the ADDR-TYPE TLV from the RERR Message-Type-specific 2878 Address Block TLV Types in Table 20 will create a new Type Extension 2879 registry, with assignments as specified in Table 21. 2881 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2882 | Name | Type | Type Extension | Description | Allocation | 2883 | | | | | Policy | 2884 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2885 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 0 | DESTINATION | | 2886 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 1 | ERRORCODE | | 2887 | ADDR-TYPE | 128 | 2-255 | Unassigned | Expert Review | 2888 +-----------+------+----------------+-------------+-----------------+ 2890 Table 21: Address Block TLV Type assignment: ADDR-TYPE 2892 Appendix B. LOADng Control Packet Illustrations 2894 This section presents example packets following this specification. 2896 B.1. RREQ 2898 RREQ messages are instances of [RFC5444] messages. This 2899 specification requires that RREQ messages contain RREQ.msg-seq-num, 2900 RREQ.msg-hop-limit, RREQ.msg-hop-count and RREQ.msg-orig-addr fields. 2902 It supports RREQ messages with any combination of remaining message 2903 header options and address encodings, enabled by [RFC5444] that 2904 convey the required information. As a consequence, there is no 2905 single way to represent how all RREQ messages look. This section 2906 illustrates an RREQ message, the exact values and content included 2907 are explained in the following text. 2909 The RREQ message's four bit Message Flags (MF) field has value 15 2910 indicating that the message header contains originator address, hop 2911 limit, hop count, and message sequence number fields. Its four bit 2912 Message Address Length (MAL) field has value 3, indicating addresses 2913 in the message have a length of four octets, here being IPv4 2914 addresses. The overall message length is 30 octets. 2916 The message has a Message TLV Block with content length 6 octets 2917 containing one TLV. The TLVs is of type METRIC and has a Flags octet 2918 (MTLVF) value 144, indicating that it has a Value, a type extension, 2919 but no start and stop indexes. The Value Length of the METRIC TLV is 2920 2 octets. 2922 The message has one Address Block. The Address Block contains 1 2923 address, with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 0, hence with no Head or Tail 2924 sections, and hence with a Mid section with length four octets. The 2925 following TLV Block (content length 2 octets) contains one TLV. The 2926 TLV is an ADDR_TYPE TLV with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 0, indicating 2927 no Value and no indexes. Thus, the address is associated with the 2928 Type ADDR_TYPE, i.e., it is the destination address of the RREQ. 2930 0 1 2 3 2931 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2932 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2933 | RREQ | MF=15 | MAL=3 | Message Length = 30 | 2934 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2935 | Originator Address | 2936 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2937 | Hop Limit | Hop Count | Message Sequence Number | 2938 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2939 | Message TLV Block Length = 6 | METRIC | MTLVF = 144 | 2940 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2941 | Type Ext. | Value Len = 2 | Value (metric) | 2942 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2943 | Num Addrs = 1 | ABF = 0 | Mid | 2944 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2945 | Mid | Address TLV Block Length = 2 | 2946 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2947 | ADDR-TYPE | ATLVF = 0 | 2948 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2950 B.2. RREP 2952 RREP messages are instances of [RFC5444] messages. This 2953 specification requires that RREP messages contain RREP.msg-seq-num, 2954 RREP.msg-hop-limit, RREP.msg-hop-count and RREP.msg-orig-addr fields. 2955 It supports RREP messages with any combination of remaining message 2956 header options and address encodings, enabled by [RFC5444] that 2957 convey the required information. As a consequence, there is no 2958 single way to represent how all RREP messages look. This section 2959 illustrates an RREP message, the exact values and content included 2960 are explained in the following text. 2962 The RREP message's four bit Message Flags (MF) field has value 15 2963 indicating that the message header contains originator address, hop 2964 limit, hop count, and message sequence number fields. Its four bit 2965 Message Address Length (MAL) field has value 3, indicating addresses 2966 in the message have a length of four octets, here being IPv4 2967 addresses. The overall message length is 34 octets. 2969 The message has a Message TLV Block with content length 10 octets 2970 containing two TLVs. The first TLV is of type METRIC and has a Flags 2971 octet (MTLVF) value 144, indicating that it has a Value, a type 2972 extension, but no start and stop indexes. The Value Length of the 2973 METRIC TLV is 2 octets. The second TLV is of type FLAGS and has a 2974 Flags octet (MTLVF) value of 16, indicating that it has a Value, but 2975 no type extension or start and stop indexes. The Value Length of the 2976 FLAGS TLV is 1 octet. The TLV value is 0x80 indicating that the 2977 ackrequired flag is set. 2979 The message has one Address Block. The Address Block contains 1 2980 address, with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 0, hence with no Head or Tail 2981 sections, and hence with a Mid section with length four octets. The 2982 following TLV Block (content length 2 octets) contains one TLV. The 2983 TLV is an ADDR_TYPE TLV with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 0, indicating 2984 no Value and no indexes. Thus, the address is associated with the 2985 Type ADDR_TYPE, i.e., it is the destination address of the RREP. 2987 0 1 2 3 2988 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2989 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2990 | RREP | MF=15 | MAL=3 | Message Length = 34 | 2991 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2992 | Originator Address | 2993 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2994 | Hop Limit | Hop Count | Message Sequence Number | 2995 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2996 | Message TLV Block Length = 10 | METRIC | MTLVF = 144 | 2997 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 2998 | Type Ext. | Value Len = 2 | Value (metric) | 2999 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3000 | FLAGS | MTLVF = 16 | Value Len = 1 | Value (0x80) | 3001 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3002 | Num Addrs = 1 | ABF = 0 | Mid | 3003 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3004 | Mid | Address TLV Block Length = 2 | 3005 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3006 | ADDR-TYPE | ATLVF = 0 | 3007 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3009 B.3. RREP_ACK 3011 RREP_ACK messages are instances of [RFC5444] messages. This 3012 specification requires that RREP_ACK messages contains RREP_ACK.msg- 3013 seq-num. It supports RREP_ACK messages with any combination of 3014 remaining message header options and address encodings, enabled by 3015 [RFC5444] that convey the required information. As a consequence, 3016 there is no single way to represent how all RREP_ACK messages look. 3017 This section illustrates an RREP_ACK message, the exact values and 3018 content included are explained in the following text. 3020 The RREP_ACK message's four bit Message Flags (MF) field has value 1 3021 indicating that the message header contains the message sequence 3022 number field. Its four bit Message Address Length (MAL) field has 3023 value 3, indicating addresses in the message have a length of four 3024 octets, here being IPv4 addresses. The overall message length is 18 3025 octets. 3027 The message has a Message TLV Block with content length 0 octets 3028 containing zero TLVs. 3030 The message has one Address Block. The Address Block contains 1 3031 address, with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 0, hence with no Head or Tail 3032 sections, and hence with a Mid section with length four octets. The 3033 following TLV Block (content length 2 octets) contains one TLV. The 3034 TLV is an ADDR_TYPE TLV with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 0, indicating 3035 no Value and no indexes. Thus, the address is associated with the 3036 Type ADDR_TYPE, i.e., it is the destination address of the RREP_ACK. 3038 0 1 2 3 3039 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 3040 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3041 | RREP_ACK | MF=1 | MAL=3 | Message Length = 18 | 3042 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3043 | Message Sequence Number | Message TLV Block Length = 0 | 3044 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3045 | Num Addrs = 1 | ABF = 0 | Mid | 3046 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3047 | Mid | Address TLV Block Length = 2 | 3048 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3049 | ADDR-TYPE | ATLVF = 0 | 3050 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3052 B.4. RERR 3054 RERR messages are instances of [RFC5444] messages. This 3055 specification supports RERR messages with any combination of message 3056 header options and address encodings, enabled by [RFC5444] that 3057 convey the required information. As a consequence, there is no 3058 single way to represent how all RERR messages look. This section 3059 illustrates an RERR message, the exact values and content included 3060 are explained in the following text. 3062 The RERR message's four bit Message Flags (MF) field has value 12 3063 indicating that the message header contains RERR.msg-orig-addr field 3064 and RERR.msg-hop-limit field. Its four bit Message Address Length 3065 (MAL) field has value 3, indicating addresses in the message have a 3066 length of four octets, here being IPv4 addresses. The overall 3067 message length is 30 octets. 3069 The message has a Message TLV Block with content length 0 octets 3070 containing zero TLVs. 3072 The message has one Address Block. The Address Block contains 2 3073 addresses, with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 128, hence with a Head 3074 section (with length 3 octets), but no Tail section, and hence with 3075 Mid sections with length one octet. The following TLV Block (content 3076 length 9 octets) contains two TLVs. The first TLV is an ADDR_TYPE 3077 TLV with Flags octet (ATLVF) value 64, indicating a single index of 3078 0, but no Value. Thus, the first address is associated with the Type 3079 ADDR_TYPE and Type Extension DESTINATION, i.e., it is the destination 3080 address of the RERR. The second TLV is an ADDR_TYPE TLV with Flags 3081 octet (ATLVF) value 208, indicating Type Extension, Value, and single 3082 index. Thus, the second address is associated with the Type 3083 ADDR_TYPE, Type Extension ERRORCODE, and Value 0, i.e., it is 3084 associated with error code 0. 3086 0 1 2 3 3087 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 3088 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3089 | RERR | MF=12 | MAL=3 | Message Length = 30 | 3090 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3091 | Originator Address | 3092 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3093 | Hop Limit | Message TLV Block Length = 0 | Num Addrs = 2 | 3094 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3095 | ABF = 128 | Head Len = 3 | Head | 3096 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3097 | Head | Mid | Address TLV | 3098 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3099 |Block Length= 9| ADDR-TYPE | ATLVF = 64 | Index = 0 | 3100 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3101 | ADDR-TYPE | ATLVF = 208 |TypEx=ERRORCODE| Index = 1 | 3102 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3103 | Value Len = 1 | Value = 0 | 3104 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 3106 Authors' Addresses 3108 Thomas Heide Clausen 3109 LIX, Ecole Polytechnique 3111 Phone: +33 6 6058 9349 3112 EMail: T.Clausen@computer.org 3113 URI: http://www.ThomasClausen.org/ 3115 Axel Colin de Verdiere 3116 LIX, Ecole Polytechnique 3118 Phone: +33 6 1264 7119 3119 EMail: axel@axelcdv.com 3120 URI: http://www.axelcdv.com/ 3121 Jiazi Yi 3122 LIX, Ecole Polytechnique 3124 Phone: +33 1 6933 4031 3125 EMail: jiazi@jiaziyi.com 3126 URI: http://www.jiaziyi.com/ 3128 Afshin Niktash 3129 Maxim Integrated Products 3131 Phone: +1 94 9450 1692 3132 EMail: afshin.niktash@maxim-ic.com 3133 URI: http://www.Maxim-ic.com/ 3135 Yuichi Igarashi 3136 Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory 3138 Phone: +81 45 860 3083 3139 EMail: yuichi.igarashi.hb@hitachi.com 3140 URI: http://www.hitachi.com/ 3142 Hiroki Satoh 3143 Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory 3145 Phone: +81 44 959 0205 3146 EMail: hiroki.satoh.yj@hitachi.com 3147 URI: http://www.hitachi.com/ 3149 Ulrich Herberg 3150 Fujitsu Laboratories of America 3152 Phone: +1 408 530 4528 3153 EMail: ulrich@herberg.name 3154 URI: http://www.herberg.name/ 3156 Cedric Lavenu 3157 EDF R&D 3159 Phone: +33 1 4765 2729 3160 EMail: cedric-2.lavenu@edf.fr 3161 URI: http://www.edf.fr/ 3162 Thierry Lys 3163 ERDF 3165 Phone: +33 1 8197 6777 3166 EMail: thierry.lys@erdfdistribution.fr 3167 URI: http://www.erdfdistribution.fr/ 3169 Justin Dean 3170 Naval Research Laboratory 3172 EMail: jdean@itd.nrl.navy.mil 3173 URI: http://cs.itd.nrl.navy.mil/