Using RPI Option Type, Routing Header for Source Routes and IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation in the RPL Data Plane
draft-ietf-roll-useofrplinfo-44
- Versions
- 00
- 01
- 02
- 03
- 04
- 05
- 06
- 07
- 08
- 09
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (roll WG) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Authors | Ines Robles , Michael Richardson , Pascal Thubert | |||
Last updated | 2021-02-16 (latest revision 2021-01-15) | |||
Replaces | draft-robles-roll-useofrplinfo | |||
Stream | IETF | |||
Intended RFC status | Proposed Standard | |||
Formats | plain text pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex | |||
Reviews | ||||
Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication (wg milestone: Mar 2020 - Initial Submission o... ) | ||
Document shepherd | Peter Van der Stok | |||
Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2020-06-14) | |||
IESG | IESG state | RFC Ed Queue | ||
Action Holders |
(None)
|
|||
Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | |||
Telechat date | ||||
Responsible AD | Alvaro Retana | |||
Send notices to | Peter Van der Stok <consultancy@vanderstok.org>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com | |||
IANA | IANA review state | Version Changed - Review Needed | ||
IANA action state | RFC-Ed-Ack | |||
RFC Editor | RFC Editor state | RFC-EDITOR | ||
Details |
ROLL Working Group M. Robles Internet-Draft UTN-FRM/Aalto Updates: 6553, 6550, 8138 (if approved) M. Richardson Intended status: Standards Track SSW Expires: July 19, 2021 P. Thubert Cisco January 15, 2021 Using RPI Option Type, Routing Header for Source Routes and IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation in the RPL Data Plane draft-ietf-roll-useofrplinfo-44 Abstract This document looks at different data flows through LLN (Low-Power and Lossy Networks) where RPL (IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks) is used to establish routing. The document enumerates the cases where RFC6553 (RPI Option Type), RFC6554 (Routing Header for Source Routes) and IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation is required in data plane. This analysis provides the basis on which to design efficient compression of these headers. This document updates RFC6553 adding a change to the RPI Option Type. Additionally, this document updates RFC6550 defining a flag in the DIO Configuration option to indicate about this change and updates RFC8138 as well to consider the new Option Type when the RPL Option is decompressed. 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 July 19, 2021. Robles, et al. Expires July 19, 2021 [Page 1] Internet-Draft RPL-data-plane January 2021 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2021 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 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology and Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. RPL Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Updates to RFC6550, RFC6553 and RFC8138 . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1. Updates to RFC6550 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1.1. Advertising External Routes with Non-Storing Mode Signaling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1.2. Configuration Options and Mode of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1.3. Indicating the new RPI in the DODAG Configuration option Flag. . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2. Updates to RFC6553: Indicating the new RPI Option Type. . 10 4.3. Updates to RFC8138: Indicating the way to decompress with the new RPI Option Type. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5. Sample/reference topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6. Use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. Storing mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 7.1. Storing Mode: Interaction between Leaf and Root . . . . . 20 7.1.1. SM: Example of Flow from RAL to Root . . . . . . . . 21 7.1.2. SM: Example of Flow from Root to RAL . . . . . . . . 22 7.1.3. SM: Example of Flow from Root to RUL . . . . . . . . 22 7.1.4. SM: Example of Flow from RUL to Root . . . . . . . . 24 7.2. SM: Interaction between Leaf and Internet. . . . . . . . 25 7.2.1. SM: Example of Flow from RAL to Internet . . . . . . 25 7.2.2. SM: Example of Flow from Internet to RAL . . . . . . 27 7.2.3. SM: Example of Flow from RUL to Internet . . . . . . 28 7.2.4. SM: Example of Flow from Internet to RUL. . . . . . . 29Show full document text