Transmission of SCHC-compressed packets over IEEE 802.15.4 networks
draft-gomez-6lo-schc-15dot4-01
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Replaced".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Carles Gomez , Ana Minaburo | ||
| Last updated | 2021-10-23 | ||
| Replaced by | draft-ietf-6lo-schc-15dot4 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-gomez-6lo-schc-15dot4-01
6lo Working Group C.G. Gomez
Internet-Draft UPC
Intended status: Standards Track A.M. Minaburo
Expires: 26 April 2022 Acklio
October 2021
Transmission of SCHC-compressed packets over IEEE 802.15.4 networks
draft-gomez-6lo-schc-15dot4-01
Abstract
A framework called Static Context Header Compression and
fragmentation (SCHC) has been designed with the primary goal of
supporting IPv6 over Low Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies
[RFC8724]. One of the SCHC components is a header compression
mechanism. If used properly, SCHC header compression allows a
greater compression ratio than that achievable with traditional
6LoWPAN header compression [RFC6282]. For this reason, it may make
sense to use SCHC header compression in some 6LoWPAN environments,
including IEEE 802.15.4 networks. This document specifies how a
SCHC-compressed packet can be carried over IEEE 802.15.4 networks.
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 https://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 4 April 2022.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Requirements language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Background on SCHC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Network topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Protocol stack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Frame Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. SCHC Dispatch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. SCHC Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.3. Padding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. SCHC compression for IPv6, UDP, and CoAP headers . . . . . . 6
5.1. SCHC compression for IPv6 and UDP headers . . . . . . . . 6
5.1.1. Compression of IPv6 addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1.2. Compression of UDP ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. SCHC compression for CoAP headers . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.3. Header compression examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Fragmentation and reassembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
RFC 6282 is the main specification for IPv6 over Low power Wireless
Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN) IPv6 header compression [RFC6282].
This RFC was designed assuming IEEE 802.15.4 as the layer below the
6LoWPAN adaptation layer, and it has also been reused (with proper
adaptations) for IPv6 header compression over many other technologies
relatively similar to IEEE 802.15.4 in terms of characteristics such
as physical layer bit rate, layer 2 maximum payload size, etc.
Examples of such technologies comprise BLE, DECT-ULE, ITU G.9959, MS/
TP, NFC, and PLC. RFC 6282 provides additional functionality, such
as a mechanism for UDP header compression.
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
In the best cases, RFC 6282 allows to compress a 40-byte IPv6 header
down to a 2-byte compressed header (for link-local interactions) or a
3-byte compressed header (when global IPv6 addresses are used). On
the other hand, an RFC 6282 compressed UDP header has a typical size
of 4 bytes. Therefore, in advantageous conditions, a 48-byte
uncompressed IPv6/UDP header may be compressed down to a 6-byte
format (when using link-local addresses) or a 7-byte format (for
global interactions) by using RFC 6282.
Recently, a framework called Static Context Header Compression (SCHC)
has been designed with the primary goal of supporting IPv6 over Low
Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies [RFC8724]. SCHC
comprises header compression and fragmentation functionality tailored
to the extraordinary constraints of LPWAN technologies, which are
more severe than those exhibited by IEEE 802.15.4 or other relatively
similar technologies. SCHC header compression allows a greater
compression ratio than that of RFC 6282. If used properly, SCHC
allows to compress an IPv6/UDP header down to e.g. a single byte. In
addition, SCHC can be used to compress Constrained Application
Protocol (CoAP) headers as well [RFC7252][RFC8824], which further
increases the achievable performance improvement of using SCHC header
compression, since there is no 6LoWPAN header compression defined for
CoAP. Therefore, it may make sense to use SCHC header compression in
some 6LoWPAN environments [I-D.toutain-6lo-6lo-and-schc], including
IEEE 802.15.4 networks, considering its greater efficiency.
If SCHC header compression is added to the panoply of header
compression mechanisms used in 6LoWPAN environments, then there is a
need to signal when a packet header has been compressed by using
SCHC. To this end, the present document specifies a 6LoWPAN Dispatch
Type for SCHC header compression [RFC4944].
This document specifies how a SCHC-compressed packet can be carried
over IEEE 802.15.4 networks. Note that, as per this document, and
while SCHC defines fragmentation mechanisms as well, 6LoWPAN/6Lo
fragmentation is used when necessary to transport SCHC-compressed
packets over IEEE 802.15.4 networks [RFC4944][RFC8930][RFC8931].
TO-DO: indicate here any specific updates of RFC 8724 for use over
IEEE 802.15.4.
2. Terminology
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
2.1. Requirements language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP14 [RFC2119], [RFC8174], when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2.2. Background on SCHC
The reader is expected to be familiar with the terms and concepts
defined in the specification of SCHC (RFC 8724).
3. Architecture
3.1. Network topologies
IEEE 802.15.4 supports two main network topologies: the star
topology, and the peer-to-peer (i.e., mesh) topology.
SCHC has been designed for LPWAN technologies, which are typically
based on a star topology where constrained devices (e.g., sensors)
communicate with a less constrained, central network gateway [RFC
8376]. However, as stated in [draft-ietf-lpwan-architecture], SCHC
is generic and it can also be used in networking environments beyond
the ones originally considered for SCHC.
SCHC compression is applicable to both star topology and mesh
topology IEEE 802.15.4 networks.
3.2. Protocol stack
The traditional 6LoWPAN-based protocol stack for constrained devices
(Figure 1, left) places the 6LoWPAN adaptation layer between IPv6 and
an underlying technology such as IEEE 802.15.4. Suitable upper layer
protocols include CoAP [RFC7252] and UDP. (Note that, while CoAP has
also been specified over TCP, and TCP may play a significant role in
IoT environments [RFC9006], 6LoWPAN header compression has not been
defined for TCP.)
6LoWPAN can be envisioned as a set of two main sublayers, where the
upper one provides header compression, while the lower one offers
fragmentation.
This document defines an alternative approach for packet header
compression over IEEE 802.15.4, which leads to a modified protocol
stack (Figure 1, right).
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
+------------+ +------------+
| CoAP, other| | CoAP, other|
+------------+ +------------+
| UDP, other | | UDP, other |
+------------+ +------------+
| IPv6 | | IPv6 |
+------------+ +------------+
| 6LoWPAN HC | | SCHC HC | <-- NEW
+------------+ +------------+
|6LoWPAN Frag| |6LoWPAN Frag|
+------------+ +------------+
| 802.15.4 | | 802.15.4 |
+------------+ +------------+
Figure 1: Traditional 6LoWPAN-based protocol stack over IEEE
802.15.4 (left) and alternative protocol stack using SCHC for
header compression (right). HC and Frag stand for Header
Compression and Fragmentation, respectively.
SCHC header compression may be applied to the headers of different
protocols or sets of protocols. Some examples include: i) IPv6
packet headers, ii) joint IPv6 and UDP packet headers, iii) joint
IPv6, UDP and CoAP packet headers, etc.
4. Frame Format
This document defines the frame format to be used when a SCHC-
compressed packet is carried over IEEE 802.15.4. Such format is
carried as IEEE 802.15.4 frame payload. The format comprises a SCHC
Dispatch Type, a SCHC Packet (i.e. a SCHC-compressed packet (RFC
8724), and Padding bits, if any). Figure 2 illustrates the described
frame format.
<---------- IEEE 802.15.4 frame payload ---------->
<----- SCHC Packet ----->
+---------------+-------------+---------+ - - - - +
| SCHC Dispatch | SCHC Header | Payload | Padding |
+---------------+-------------+---------+ - - - - +
Figure 2: Encapsulated, SCHC-compressed packet. Padding bits are
added if needed.
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
4.1. SCHC Dispatch
Adding SCHC header compression to the panoply of header compression
mechanisms used in 6LoWPAN/6Lo environments creates the need to
signal when a packet header has been compressed by using SCHC. To
this end, the present document specifies the SCHC Dispatch. The SCHC
Dispatch indicates that the next field in the frame format is a SCHC-
compressed header (SCHC Header in Figure 2, see 4.2)).
This document defines the SCHC Dispatch as a 6LoWPAN Dispatch Type
for SCHC header compression [RFC4944]. With the aim to minimize
overhead, the present document allocates a 1-byte pattern in Page 0
[RFC8025] for the SCHC Dispatch Type:
SCHC Dispatch Type bit pattern: 01000100 (Page 0) (Note: to be
confirmed by IANA))
4.2. SCHC Header
SCHC Header (Figure 2) corresponds to a packet header that has been
compressed by using SCHC. As defined in [RFC8724], the SCHC Header
comprises a RuleID, and a compression residue. The present
specification defines a RuleID size of 8 bits.
4.3. Padding
If SCHC header compression leads to a SCHC Packet size of a non-
integer number of bytes, padding bits of value equal to zero MUST be
appended to the SCHC Packet as appropriate to align to an octet
boundary.
5. SCHC compression for IPv6, UDP, and CoAP headers
SCHC header compression may be applied to the headers of different
protocols or sets of protocols. Some examples include: i) IPv6
packet headers, ii) joint IPv6 and UDP packet headers, iii) joint
IPv6, UDP and CoAP packet headers, etc.
5.1. SCHC compression for IPv6 and UDP headers
With the exception of IPv6 addresses and UDP ports, IPv6 and UDP
header fields MUST be compressed as per Section 10 of RFC 8724.
IPv6 addresses are split into two 64-bit-long fields; one for the
prefix and one for the Interface Identifier (IID).
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
To allow for a single Rule being used for both directions, RFC 8724
identifies IPv6 addresses and UDP ports by their role (Dev or App)
and not by their position in the header (source or destination).
However, such roles are not applicable in some types of 6LoWPAN
environments (e.g., when a sender and its destination are both nodes
in a mesh topology network). In such cases, the terms Uplink and
Downlink as they have been defined in RFC 8724 are not applicable
either.
The present specification identifies IPv6 addresses and UDP ports by
their position in the header (source or destination). Accordingly,
the present specification defines two new values for the Direction
Indicator: Transmit (Tx) and Receive (Rx).
5.1.1. Compression of IPv6 addresses
Compression of IPv6 source and destination prefixes MUST be performed
as per Section 10.7.1 of RFC 8724.
If the source or destination IID are based on an L2 address, then the
IID can be reconstructed with information coming from the L2 header.
In that case, the TV is not set, the MO is set to "ignore" and the
CDA is set to compute-IID.
As described in [RFC8065], it may be undesirable to build the source
IPv6 IID of a device out of the device address. Another static value
is used instead. In that case, the TV contains the static value, the
MO operator is set to "equal" and the CDA is set to "not-sent".
If several IIDs are possible, then the TV contains the list of
possible IIDs, the MO is set to "match-mapping" and the CDA is set to
"mapping-sent".
It may also happen that the IID variability only expresses itself on
a few bytes. In that case, the TV is set to the stable part of the
IID, the MO is set to "MSB" and the CDA is set to "LSB".
5.1.2. Compression of UDP ports
TO-DO
5.2. SCHC compression for CoAP headers
CoAP header fields MUST be compressed as per Sections 4 to 6 of RFC
8824.
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
5.3. Header compression examples
TO-DO: provide examples for IPv6-only, IPv6/UDP and IPv6/UDP/CoAP.
6. Fragmentation and reassembly
After applying SCHC header compression to a packet intended for
transmission, if the size of the resulting frame format (Section 4)
exceeds the IEEE 802.15.4 frame payload space available, such frame
format MUST be fragmented, carried and reassembled by means of
6LoWPAN fragmentation and reassembly [RFC4944][RFC8930][RFC8931].
7. IANA Considerations
This document requests the allocation of the Dispatch Type Field bit
pattern 01000100 (Page 0) as SCHC Dispatch Type.
8. Security Considerations
This document does not define SCHC header compression functionality
beyond the one defined in RFC 8724. Therefore, the security
considerations in section 12.1 of RFC 8724 apply.
As a safety measure, a SCHC decompressor implementing the present
specification MUST NOT reconstruct a packet larger than 1500 bytes
[RFC8724].
9. Acknowledgments
Ana Minaburo and Laurent Toutain suggested for the first time the use
of SCHC in environments where 6LoWPAN has traditionally been used.
Laurent Toutain, Pascal Thubert, Dominique Barthel, and Guangpeng Li
made comments that helped shape this document.
Carles Gomez has been funded in part by the Spanish Government
through project PID2019-106808RA-I00, and by Secretaria
d'Universitats i Recerca del Departament d'Empresa i Coneixement de
la Generalitat de Catalunya 2017 through grant SGR 376.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
[RFC4944] Montenegro, G., Kushalnagar, N., Hui, J., and D. Culler,
"Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4
Networks", RFC 4944, DOI 10.17487/RFC4944, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4944>.
[RFC6282] Hui, J., Ed. and P. Thubert, "Compression Format for IPv6
Datagrams over IEEE 802.15.4-Based Networks", RFC 6282,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6282, September 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6282>.
[RFC7252] Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "The Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 7252,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7252, June 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7252>.
[RFC8025] Thubert, P., Ed. and R. Cragie, "IPv6 over Low-Power
Wireless Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN) Paging Dispatch",
RFC 8025, DOI 10.17487/RFC8025, November 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8025>.
[RFC8065] Thaler, D., "Privacy Considerations for IPv6 Adaptation-
Layer Mechanisms", RFC 8065, DOI 10.17487/RFC8065,
February 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8065>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8724] Minaburo, A., Toutain, L., Gomez, C., Barthel, D., and JC.
Zuniga, "SCHC: Generic Framework for Static Context Header
Compression and Fragmentation", RFC 8724,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8724, April 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8724>.
[RFC8824] Minaburo, A., Toutain, L., and R. Andreasen, "Static
Context Header Compression (SCHC) for the Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP)", RFC 8824,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8824, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8824>.
[RFC8930] Watteyne, T., Ed., Thubert, P., Ed., and C. Bormann, "On
Forwarding 6LoWPAN Fragments over a Multi-Hop IPv6
Network", RFC 8930, DOI 10.17487/RFC8930, November 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8930>.
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft SCHC compression over IEEE 802.15.4 October 2021
[RFC8931] Thubert, P., Ed., "IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal
Area Network (6LoWPAN) Selective Fragment Recovery",
RFC 8931, DOI 10.17487/RFC8931, November 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8931>.
10.2. Informative References
[I-D.toutain-6lo-6lo-and-schc]
Minaburo, A. and L. Toutain, "Comparison of 6lo and SCHC",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-toutain-6lo-6lo-
and-schc-00, 4 November 2019,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-toutain-6lo-6lo-
and-schc-00.txt>.
[RFC9006] Gomez, C., Crowcroft, J., and M. Scharf, "TCP Usage
Guidance in the Internet of Things (IoT)", RFC 9006,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9006, March 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9006>.
Authors' Addresses
Carles Gomez
UPC
C/Esteve Terradas, 7
08860 Castelldefels
Spain
Email: carlesgo@entel.upc.edu
Ana Minaburo
Acklio
1137A avenue des Champs Blancs
35510 Cesson-Sevigne Cedex
France
Email: ana@ackl.io
Gomez & Minaburo Expires 26 April 2022 [Page 10]