Comparison of 6lo and SCHC
draft-toutain-6lo-6lo-and-schc-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2019-11-04
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)
6lo Working Group                                            A. Minaburo
Internet-Draft                                                    Acklio
Intended status: Standards Track                              L. Toutain
Expires: May 7, 2020              Institut MINES TELECOM; IMT Atlantique
                                                       November 04, 2019

                       Comparison of 6lo and SCHC
                   draft-toutain-6lo-6lo-and-schc-00

Abstract

   6lo and 6lowpan have standardized a stateless IPv6 and UDP
   compression method for mesh networks.  SCHC proposes a generic
   compression mechanism that can be applied to any protocol stack.  The
   lpwan working group is focusing on star topologies for IPv6, UDP and
   CoAP header compression and fragmentation.

   This document summarizes the differences between 6lo and SCHC and
   possible combination of SCHC and 6lo.

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 May 7, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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

Minaburo & Toutain         Expires May 7, 2020                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                6lo and SCHC                 November 2019

   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.  Comparison  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     2.1.  Stateless compression.  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     2.2.  Meshed vs Star  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     2.3.  Alignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Uniform vs specific compression rules.  . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Bitmap vs Rule ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Applicability of SCHC in a 6lo network. . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   6lo and 6lowpan have standardized a stateless IPv6 and UDP
   compression method for mesh networks.  SCHC proposes a generic
   compression mechanism that can be applied to any protocol stack.  The
   lpwan working group is focusing on star topologies for IPv6, UDP and
   CoAP header compression and fragmentation.

   This document summarizes the differences between 6lo and SCHC and
   possible combination of SCHC and 6lo.

2.  Comparison

2.1.  Stateless compression.

   Both compression protocols are stateless regarding the compression/
   decompression process.  Each packet is compressed and decompressed
   independently of the others and no information is stored during
   compression or decompression.

   The SCHC name comes from the fact that it is a generic mechanism and
   the context tells how to compress a specific packet.

2.2.  Meshed vs Star

   6lo is defined for meshed network therefore all the node must be able
   to manipulate any 6lo packet.

Minaburo & Toutain         Expires May 7, 2020                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                6lo and SCHC                 November 2019

   SCHC is defined for star network and compression is done at both
   ends.  SCHC offers the possibility to have different compression
   scheme for each branch of the star.  This scheme is described though
   a context.

   If SCHC had to be used in a mesh network, all the intermediary nodes
   will have to know the rules used in the network.

2.3.  Alignment

   6lo preserves alignment on bye boundary when sending header fields.
   SCHC is bit oriented and padding can be added when the packet is
   sent.

3.  Uniform vs specific compression rules.
Show full document text