Transport-layer Multicast Security for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (LLNs)
draft-kumar-dice-multicast-security-00
Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Sandeep S. Kumar , Rene Struik | ||
Last updated | 2015-09-10 (Latest revision 2015-03-09) | ||
RFC stream | (None) | ||
Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
Formats | |||
Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
Telechat date | (None) | ||
Responsible AD | (None) | ||
Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
CoAP and 6LoWPAN are fast emerging as the de-facto protocol standards in the area of resource-constrained devices forming Low-power and Lossy Networks (LLNs). Unicast communication in such networks are secured at the transport layer using DTLS, as mandated by CoAP. For various applications, IP multicast-based group communications in such networks provide clear advantages. However, at this point, CoAP does not specify how to secure group communications in an interoperable way. This draft specifies two methods for securing CoAP-based group communication at the transport layer and targets deployment scenarios that may require group authentication, respectively source authentication. The specification leverages the fact that DTLS is already used as the mechanism of choice to secure unicast communications and allows group communications security to be implemented as an extension of DTLS record layer processing, thereby minimizing incremental implementation cost.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)