Use cases for DIS Modifications
draft-papadopoulos-roll-dis-mods-use-cases-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2020-03-09
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
RAW                                                      G. Papadopoulos
Internet-Draft                                            IMT Atlantique
Intended status: Standards Track                           March 9, 2020
Expires: September 10, 2020

                    Use cases for DIS Modifications
             draft-papadopoulos-roll-dis-mods-use-cases-00

Abstract

   This document presents some of the use-cases which call for DIS flags
   and options modifications.

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 10, 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
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Papadopoulos           Expires September 10, 2020               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         DIS Modifications use cases            March 2020

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Applications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     3.1.  A Leaf Node Joining a DAG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     3.2.  Identifying A Defunct DAG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.3.  Adjacencies probing with RPL  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.3.1.  Deliberations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

1.  Introduction

2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

3.  Applications

   This section details some use cases that require DIS modifications
   compared to the behaviour currently defined in [RFC6550].  The first
   use case is thatof a new leaf node joining an established DAG in an
   energy efficient manner.  The second use case describes why node
   might want to use DIS to identify defunct DAGs for which it still
   maintains state.  The third use case describes the need for adjacency
   probing and how DIS can used for that.

3.1.  A Leaf Node Joining a DAG

   This use case is typically of a smart meter being replaced in the
   field, while a RPL network is operating and stable.  The new smart
   meter must join the network quickly, without draining the energy of
   the surrounding nodes, be they battery-operated RPL routers or leaf
   nodes.  In this use case, the issues with the current RPL
   specification are

   o  Just waiting for a gratuitous DIO may take a long time if the
      Trickle timers have relaxed to the steady state.  A technician who
      has just installed the new meter needs to positively assess that
      the meter has joined the network before it leaves the premise.  It
      is not economically viable to ask the technician to standby the
      meter until a gratuitous DIO has arrived, which may take hours.

   o  If the meter sends a DIS, it needs to do so using multicast,
      because it has no knowledge of its surroundings.  Sending a

Papadopoulos           Expires September 10, 2020               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         DIS Modifications use cases            March 2020

      multicast DIS is considered an inconsistency by the nearby RPL
      routers.  They will reset their Trickle timer to the shortest
      period.  This will trigger sending a stream of DIOs until the
      Trickle timers relax again.  The DIOs will be sent in multicast,
      which will trigger energy expenditure at nearby nodes, which had
      no need for the DIOs.

   A proposed solution could be the following.  A new leaf node that
Show full document text