Network Working Group C. Bormann
Internet-Draft Universitaet Bremen TZI
Intended status: Informational January 25, 2018
Expires: July 29, 2018
Virtual reassembly buffers in 6LoWPAN
draft-bormann-lwig-6lowpan-virtual-reassembly-00
Abstract
When employing adaptation layer fragmentation in 6LoWPAN, it may be
beneficial for a forwarder not to have to reassemble each packet in
its entirety before forwarding it.
This has been always possible with the original fragmentation design
of RFC 4944. Apart from a brief mention of the way to do this in
Section 2.5.2 of the 6LoWPAN book, this has not been extensively
described in the literature. The present document attempts to fill
that gap.
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 29, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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
Bormann Expires July 29, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Virtual reassembly buffers in 6LoWPAN January 2018
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. Reassembly buffers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Virtual reassembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Header compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Introduction
(TO DO: Insert an extended form of the abstract first here, expanding
the references to [RFC4944] and [BOOK] in the process.)
2. Reassembly buffers
An adaptation layer implementation for 6LoWPAN needs to perform
reassembly of every fragmented packet received in order to be able to
forward the packet (re-fragmenting it in the process).
A reassembly buffer for 6LoWPAN contains:
o datagram_size,
o datagram_tag and L2 sender and receiver addresses (to which the
datagram_tag is local),
o actual packet data from the fragments received so far, in a form
that makes it possible to detect when the whole packet has been
received and can be processed or forwarded,
o a timer that allows discarding the partial packet after a timeout.
This requires a reassembly buffer for each fragmented packet the
reception of which is in progress. Since the forwarder may be
receiving fragments for multiple packets concurrently (e.g., from
different senders), this means that multiple reassembly buffers are
needed, easily dominating the memory requirements in a 6LoWPAN
Bormann Expires July 29, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Virtual reassembly buffers in 6LoWPAN January 2018
implementation. Worse, as this space may still be limited, any lack
of reassembly buffers may lead to an increased loss rate for
fragmented packets (which already have to cope with a higher compound
loss rate).
3. Virtual reassembly
To reduce the memory requirement for reassembly buffers, the
implementation may opt to not keep the actual packet data in the
reassembly buffer. Instead, it may attempt to send out the data for
a fragment in the form of a forwarded fragment, as soon as all
necessary information for that is available. Obviously, all
fragments need to be sent with the same outgoing address (otherwise a
full reassembly implementation would discard the fragments) and the
same datagram_tag.
To this end, the reassembly buffer now also stores, as soon as enough
of the packet is available to make a forwarding decision (i.e., as
soon as the first fragment has been received):
o L2 destination address used for forwarding,
o outgoing datagram_tag chosen for this packet.
A simple implementation may do away with any attempt to keep packet
data in the virtual reassembly buffer. It then has to discard all
non-first fragments for which a reassembly buffer is not already
available (penalizing reordering, which however may be rare).
Note that the decision to do local processing of a packet needs to be
taken with the first fragment - such packets of course do need to be
fully reassembled (unless transport and application also can cope
with fragments, which they rarely can in the presence of security).
4. Header compression
[RFC6282] defines the header compression format for 6LoWPAN. One
important impact of header compression is that the header is no
longer of a fixed length. In particular, changes made by a forwarder
may gain or lose the ability to use a more highly compressed variant,
changing the length of the header in the packet. If the change
increases the size, the maximum frame size may be exceeded, leading
to the need to re-fragment in the forwarder. This is less of a
problem with full reassembly, but with virtual reassembly can lead to
the need for sending an additional frame for each packet.
The well-known approach to minimize the probability of this need is
for the original sender to put all slack in the frame sizes into the
Bormann Expires July 29, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Virtual reassembly buffers in 6LoWPAN January 2018
_first_ packet, making this the smallest fragment and not the last
one as would be done in a naive implementation. (This also has other
consequences related to delivery probability, which are not discussed
here.) This makes sure an additional fragment only needs to be sent
if the header expansion during forwarding would have created an
additional fragment with full reassembly as well.
5. IANA Considerations
This document makes no requests of IANA.
6. Security considerations
TBD
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC4944] Montenegro, G., Kushalnagar, N., Hui, J., and D. Culler,
"Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4
Networks", RFC 4944, DOI 10.17487/RFC4944, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4944>.
7.2. Informative References
[BOOK] Shelby, Z. and C. Bormann, "6LoWPAN", John Wiley & Sons,
Ltd monograph, DOI 10.1002/9780470686218, November 2009.
[RFC6282] Hui, J., Ed. and P. Thubert, "Compression Format for IPv6
Datagrams over IEEE 802.15.4-Based Networks", RFC 6282,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6282, September 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6282>.
Acknowledgements
Many people have mentioned that it would be good to have a
description of virtual reassembly in 6LoWPAN. Finally, Thomas
Watteyne assembled a design team that intends to work on 6Lo
fragmentation. Writing up the present document has been motivated by
that work.
Author's Address
Bormann Expires July 29, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Virtual reassembly buffers in 6LoWPAN January 2018
Carsten Bormann
Universitaet Bremen TZI
Postfach 330440
Bremen D-28359
Germany
Phone: +49-421-218-63921
Email: cabo@tzi.org
Bormann Expires July 29, 2018 [Page 5]
