Packet Delivery Deadline time in 6LoWPAN Routing Header
draft-ietf-6lo-deadline-time-05
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (6lo WG) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Last updated | 2019-07-08 | ||
| Stream | IETF | ||
| Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | ||
| Formats | plain text xml pdf html bibtex | ||
| Reviews | |||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Shwetha Bhandari | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2018-09-03) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | IESG Evaluation::AD Followup | |
| Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date |
Has 2 DISCUSSes. Has enough positions to pass once DISCUSS positions are resolved. |
||
| Responsible AD | Suresh Krishnan | ||
| Send notices to | Samita Chakrabarti <samitac.ietf@gmail.com>, Shwetha Bhandari <shwethab@cisco.com> | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | Version Changed - Review Needed | |
| IANA action state | None | ||
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
Show full document text