RPL applicability in industrial networks
draft-ietf-roll-rpl-industrial-applicability-00

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (roll WG)
Authors Tom Phinney  , Pascal Thubert  , Robert Assimiti 
Last updated 2013-03-14 (latest revision 2013-03-12)
Replaces draft-phinney-roll-rpl-industrial-applicability
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd None
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
ROLL                                                     T. Phinney, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                consultant
Intended status: Informational                                P. Thubert
Expires: September 13, 2013                                        Cisco
                                                            RA. Assimiti
                                                                   Nivis
                                                          March 12, 2013

                RPL applicability in industrial networks
            draft-ietf-roll-rpl-industrial-applicability-00

Abstract

   The wide deployment of wireless devices, with their low installed
   cost (compared to wired devices), will significantly improve the
   productivity and safety of industrial plants.  It will simultaneously
   increase the efficiency and safety of the plant's workers, by
   extending and making more timely the information set available about
   plant operations.  The new Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy
   Networks (RPL) defines a Distance Vector protocol that is designed
   for such networks.  The aim of this document is to analyze the
   applicability of that routing protocol in industrial LLNs formed of
   field devices.

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 http://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 13, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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

Phinney, et al.        Expires September 13, 2013               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft   RPL-industrial-applicability-statement       March 2013

   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     1.1.  Requirements Language  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.2.  Required Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.3.  Out of scope requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   2.  Deployment Scenario  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     2.1.  Network Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       2.1.1.  Traffic Characteristics  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       2.1.2.  Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       2.1.3.  Source-sink (SS) communication paradigm  . . . . . . . 11
       2.1.4.  Publish-subscribe (PS, or pub/sub) communication
               paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       2.1.5.  Peer-to-peer (P2P) communication paradigm  . . . . . . 14
       2.1.6.  Peer-to-multipeer (P2MP) communication paradigm  . . . 15
       2.1.7.  Additional considerations: Duocast and N-cast  . . . . 15
       2.1.8.  RPL applicability per communication paradigm . . . . . 17
     2.2.  Layer 2 applicability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
   3.  Using RPL to Meet Functional Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . 20
   4.  RPL Profile  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     4.1.  RPL Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
       4.1.1.  RPL Instances  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
       4.1.2.  Storing vs. Non-Storing Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
       4.1.3.  DAO Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
       4.1.4.  Path Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
       4.1.5.  Objective Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
       4.1.6.  DODAG Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
       4.1.7.  Multicast  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       4.1.8.  Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       4.1.9.  P2P communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
     4.2.  Layer-two features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       4.2.1.  Need layer-2 expert here.  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Show full document text