CoAP Communication with Alternative Transports
draft-silverajan-core-coap-alternative-transports-10

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-07-03
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html 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)
CoRE Working Group                                         B. Silverajan
Internet-Draft                          Tampere University of Technology
Intended status: Informational                             T. Savolainen
Expires: January 4, 2018                              Nokia Technologies
                                                            July 3, 2017

             CoAP Communication with Alternative Transports
          draft-silverajan-core-coap-alternative-transports-10

Abstract

   The aim of this document is to provide a way forward to best decide
   upon how alternative transport information can be expressed in a CoAP
   URI.  This draft examines the requirements for a new URI format for
   representing CoAP resources over alternative transports.  Various
   potential URI formats are presented.  Benefits and drawbacks of
   embedding alternative transport information in various ways within
   the URI components are also discussed.  From all listed formats, the
   document finds scheme-based model to be the most technically
   feasible.

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 January 4, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents

Silverajan & Savolainen  Expires January 4, 2018                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         CoAP Alternative Transports             July 2017

   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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conformance and Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Situating Transport Information in CoAP URIs  . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Using the URI scheme component  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.1.1.  Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  Using the URI authority component . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.2.1.  Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.3.  Using the URI path component  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       3.3.1.  Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.4.  Using the URI query component . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       3.4.1.  Analysis  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   4.  Discussion  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Appendix A.  Expressing transport in the URI in other ways  . . .  10
     A.1.  Transport information as part of the URI authority  . . .  10
       A.1.1.  Usage of DNS records  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     A.2.  Making CoAP Resources Available over Multiple Transports   11
     A.3.  Transport as part of a 'service:' URL scheme  . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) [RFC7252] is a
   lightweight, binary application layer protocol designed for
   constrained environments.  Owing to its operating environment, CoAP
   uses UDP and DTLS as its underlying transports between communicating
   endpoints.  However, with an increase in deployment experiences as
   well as its popularity, compelling reasons exist for extending CoAP
Show full document text