Packet Delivery Deadline time in 6LoWPAN Routing Header
draft-ietf-6lo-deadline-time-05

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00
• 01
• 02
• 03
• 04
• 05

6lo                                                          Lijo Thomas
Internet-Draft                                                     C-DAC
Intended status: Standards Track                          S. Anamalamudi
Expires: January 9, 2020                               SRM University-AP
                                                             S.V.R.Anand
                                                            Malati Hegde
                                             Indian Institute of Science
                                                              C. Perkins
                                                               Futurewei
                                                            July 8, 2019

        Packet Delivery Deadline time in 6LoWPAN Routing Header
                    draft-ietf-6lo-deadline-time-05

Abstract

   This document specifies a new type for the 6LoWPAN routing header
   containing the deadline time for data packets, designed for use over
   constrained networks.  The deadline time enables forwarding and
   scheduling decisions for time critical IoT machine to machine (M2M)
   applications that operate within time-synchronized networks that
   agree on the meaning of the time representations used for the
   deadline time values.

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 January 9, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Lijo Thomas, et al.      Expires January 9, 2020                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         6lo Delivery Deadline Time              July 2019

   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.  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
   3.  6LoRHE Generic Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Deadline-6LoRHE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Deadline-6LoRHE Format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Deadline-6LoRHE in Three Network Scenarios  . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.1.  Scenario 1: Endpoints in the same DODAG (N1)  . . . . . .   9
     6.2.  Scenario 2: Endpoints in Networks with Dissimilar L2
           Technologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     6.3.  Scenario 3: Packet transmission across different DODAGs
           (N1 to N2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   8.  Synchronization Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   Appendix A.  Changes from revision 04 to revision 05  . . . . . .  18
   Appendix B.  Changes from revision 03 to revision 04  . . . . . .  18
   Appendix C.  Changes from revision 02 to revision 03  . . . . . .  19
   Appendix D.  Changes from revision 01 to revision 02  . . . . . .  19
   Appendix E.  Changes between earlier versions . . . . . . . . . .  20
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20

1.  Introduction

   Low Power and Lossy Networks (LLNs) are likely to be deployed for
   real time industrial applications requiring end-to-end delay
   guarantees [I-D.ietf-detnet-use-cases].  A Deterministic Network
   ("detnet") typically requires some data packets to reach their