RPL Capabilities
draft-ietf-roll-capabilities-02
ROLL R. Jadhav, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei Tech
Intended status: Standards Track P. Thubert
Expires: September 12, 2020 Cisco
M. Richardson
Sandelman Software Works
R. Sahoo, Ed.
March 11, 2020
RPL Capabilities
draft-ietf-roll-capabilities-02
Abstract
This draft enables the discovery, advertisement and query of
capabilities for RPL nodes.
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 September 12, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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. 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
Jadhav, et al. Expires September 12, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RPL Capabilties March 2020
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. What are Capabilities? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements for this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. How are Capabilities different from MOP or DIO
Configuration Option? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Capability Catagories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Capability Control Message Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. Capabilities Handshake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Guidelines for defining new capabilities . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Handling Capability flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1.1. Rules to handle capabilities flag . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. ROLL Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Projected Route Capability (PRC) . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1.1. Format of Projected Route Capability . . . . . . . . 9
5.2. 6LoRH Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2.1. Format of 6LoRH Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3. Routing Resource Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3.1. Format of Routing Resource Capability . . . . . . . . 11
5.4. Neighbor Cache Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4.1. Format of Neighbor Cache Capability . . . . . . . . . 13
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1. New option: Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2. New Registry for Capabilities Flags . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Appendix A. Capability Handshake Example . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction
RPL [RFC6550] specifies a proactive distance-vector based routing
scheme. The protocol creates a DAG-like structure which operates
with a given "Mode of Operation" (MOP) determining the minimal and
mandatory set of primitives to be supported by all the participating
Show full document text