CoRE K. Li
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track X. Sun
Expires: July 30, 2013 China Telecom
January 26, 2013
CoAP Payload-Length Option Extension
draft-li-core-coap-payload-length-option-01
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the Constrained Application
Protocol (CoAP) to add one new option: Payload-Length, which is used
to indicate the length of the payload of the message.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 30, 2013.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Li & Sun Expires July 30, 2013 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft CoAP Payload Length January 2013
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Justification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Option Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Li & Sun Expires July 30, 2013 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft CoAP Payload Length January 2013
1. Introduction
This specification adds one new option to the Constrained Application
Protocol (CoAP): Payload-Length.
1.1. Motivation
If a CoAP message is transported through UDP, the message length can
be obtained from the UDP header. But not all transport mechanisms
provide an unambiguous length of the CoAP message. For example, in
industry field, there are some data tranport protocols, like RS232,
RS422, RS485, which don't provide message length indication. For
these cases, an indication of the payload length of the message is
needed in CoAP message level.
TBD: how about CAN bus protocol, USB 2.0?
With this option, it will be easier for the receiver to extract the
payload part from the whole message.
Another benefit to have this option is to check the integrity of the
message length.
1.2. Justification
To indicate the payload length, another alternative is to use
encoding method as specified in section 3.2 of [I-D.ietf-core-coap],
but it is better to use an Option for this.
Reason is that, payload length is an optional feature, and in most of
the cases, it is not necessary to be indicated. If we use encoding
method, every implementation needs to support this encoding for the
payload, not only for the options. If we use an Option for this, it
is optional, and it can be optionally implemented where necessary.