SCHC: Generic Framework for Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: IETF-Announce <email@example.com> Cc: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, Pascal Thubert <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, Dominique Barthel <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Protocol Action: 'Static Context Header Compression (SCHC) and fragmentation for LPWAN, application to UDP/IPv6' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-lpwan-ipv6-static-context-hc-24.txt) The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Static Context Header Compression (SCHC) and fragmentation for LPWAN, application to UDP/IPv6' (draft-ietf-lpwan-ipv6-static-context-hc-24.txt) as Proposed Standard This document is the product of the IPv6 over Low Power Wide-Area Networks Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Éric Vyncke and Suresh Krishnan. A URL of this Internet Draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-ipv6-static-context-hc/
Technical Summary This document defines the Static Context Header Compression (SCHC) framework, which provides both header compression and fragmentation functionalities. SCHC has been tailored for Low Power Wide Area Networks (LPWAN). SCHC compression is based on a common static context stored in both the LPWAN devices and the network side. This document defines a header compression mechanism and its application to compress IPv6/UDP headers. This document also specifies a fragmentation and reassembly mechanism that is used to support the IPv6 MTU requirement over the LPWAN technologies. Fragmentation is needed for IPv6 datagrams that, after SCHC compression or when such compression was not possible, still exceed the layer two maximum payload size. The SCHC header compression and fragmentation mechanisms are independent of the specific LPWAN technology over which they are used. Note that this document defines generic functionalities and advisedly offers flexibility with regard to parameter settings and mechanism choices. Such settings and choices are expected to be made in other technology-specific documents. Working Group Summary The WGLC comments were rich but did not show fundamental issues in the design. The 30 open tickets lead mostly to editorial changes that helped clarify the text ann avoid misinterpretation. We spent the last IETF meeting and multiple interim going through the tickets and addressed them concensualy. Document Quality The protocol has been implemented and demonstrated over LoRa and SigFox technologies. There is only one vendor proposing a stack at this point. The reviewers are acknowledged in the document. The original shepherd was Dominique Barthel. He went so deep in the process, proposing edits and helping with the corrected text, that the chairs asked him to move to a co-author position, and took over shepherding, not because he was not good enough, but because he did too well at it. Personnel The Document Shepherd is Pascal Thubert. The Responsible Area Director is Suresh Krishnan.