CORE WG A. Rahman
Internet-Draft InterDigital Communications, LLC
Intended status: Informational October 11, 2013
Expires: April 14, 2014
Sleepy Devices: Do we need to Support them in CORE?
draft-rahman-core-sleepy-nodes-do-we-need-00
Abstract
This document summarizes the discussion in the CORE WG related to the
question of whether support of sleepy devices is required for the
CoAP protocol, CORE Link Format, CORE Resource Directory, etc. The
only goal of this document is to trigger discussions in the CORE WG
so that all relevant considerations for sleeping devices are taken
into account.
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 April 14, 2014.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Rahman Expires April 14, 2014 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Sleepy Devices for CORE October 2013
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
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. Terminology and Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Drafts Related to Sleepy Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. WG Email List Poll for Sleepy Node Deliverable . . . . . . . 3
5. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Terminology and Conventions
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
This document assumes readers are familiar with the terms and
concepts that are used in [I-D.ietf-core-coap] and [RFC6690].
2. Introduction
At IETF-87 (Berlin), it was suggested to review/summarize the CORE WG
interest on the topic of Sleepy Node support. Specifically whether
the WG feels that support of sleepy endpoints is required for the
CoAP protocol, CORE Link Format, CORE Resource Directory, etc.
Alternatively, whether the WG feels that Sleepy Node support can be
completely done outside CORE such as in the lower Layer 2 (MAC)
scheduling and/or in Layer 7 (application) logic.
3. Drafts Related to Sleepy Nodes
There have been multiple drafts in the CORE WG related to the subject
of Sleepy Nodes including:
Rahman Expires April 14, 2014 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Sleepy Devices for CORE October 2013
o [I-D.rahman-core-sleepy-problem-statement] summarizes the overall
problem space of Sleepy Nodes.
o [I-D.cao-core-aol-req] defines requirements for Sleepy Nodes to
behave as if they are "always on".
o [I-D.dijk-core-sleepy-reqs] defines requirements for Sleepy Nodes
based on home and building control use cases.
o [I-D.rahman-core-sleeping] defines general requirements for Sleepy
Nodes.
o [I-D.bormann-core-roadmap] provides a classification and overview
of CORE drafts (and features) including a section on Sleepy Nodes.
o [I-D.arkko-core-sleepy-sensors] describes a sensor network
implementation and shows how different communication models affect
implementation complexity and energy consumption (including Sleepy
Node support).
o [I-D.giacomin-core-sleepy-option] defines a proxy that acts as a
store-and-forward agent for a Sleepy Node.
o [I-D.castellani-core-alive] defines a new CoAP message type which
the Sleepy Node multicasts to all interested devices when it wakes
up.
o [I-D.fossati-core-publish-option] allows an endpoint to
temporarily delegate authority of its resources (when it is
sleeping) to a proxy server that is always on.
o [I-D.fossati-core-monitor-option] extends the Observe
functionality to handle the scenario when both the server and
clients are Sleepy Nodes.
o [I-D.dijk-core-sleepy-solutions] defines an architectural approach
to support Sleepy Nodes.
o [I-D.rahman-core-sleepy] defines new parameters that describe an
endpoint's sleepy characteristics and stores them in the Resource
Directory.
o [I-D.vial-core-mirror-server] defines a special type of Resource
Directory from which endpoints can fetch the resource regardless
of the (sleep) state of the server.
4. WG Email List Poll for Sleepy Node Deliverable
Rahman Expires April 14, 2014 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Sleepy Devices for CORE October 2013
A poll was taken on the WG Email list asking the following question:
"Should we have a CORE deliverable for CoAP support of Sleepy Nodes?"
[IETF87-Poll].
The results of the poll were as follows:
o Votes FOR a new CORE Sleepy Node support deliverable: 9
o Votes AGAINST a new CORE Sleepy Node support deliverable: 3
5. Summary
There have been over ten drafts related to the concept of CORE
support of Sleepy Nodes. The WG Email list poll on the topic had a
large majority of responders supporting creation of a CORE charter
item for support of Sleepy Nodes. However there were some important
and high profile dissenters that argued against such a charter item.
Another point to consider is that during WG discussions, the CORE
Mirror Server [I-D.vial-core-mirror-server] is sometimes referred to
as the "existing" solution for CORE Sleepy Node support. However,
this draft was never adopted as a WG draft.
6. Acknowledgements
Thanks to Carsten Bormann and Zach Shelby for valuable discussions
and feedback on the topic of Sleepy Nodes.
7. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
8. Security Considerations
Not applicable.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
9.2. Informative References
[I-D.arkko-core-sleepy-sensors]
Arkko, J., Rissanen, H., Loreto, S., Turanyi, Z., and O.
Novo, "Implementing Tiny COAP Sensors", draft-arkko-core-
sleepy-sensors-01 (work in progress), July 2011.
Rahman Expires April 14, 2014 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Sleepy Devices for CORE October 2013
[I-D.bormann-core-roadmap]
Bormann, C., "CoRE Roadmap and Implementation Guide",
draft-bormann-core-roadmap-04 (work in progress), May
2013.
[I-D.cao-core-aol-req]
Cao, Z., "Allways-online Requirement for Sleeping CoAP
Node", draft-cao-core-aol-req-00 (work in progress), July
2011.
[I-D.castellani-core-alive]
Castellani, A. and S. Loreto, "CoAP Alive Message", draft-
castellani-core-alive-00 (work in progress), March 2012.
[I-D.dijk-core-sleepy-reqs]
Dijk, E., "Sleepy Devices using CoAP - Requirements",
draft-dijk-core-sleepy-reqs-00 (work in progress), June
2013.
[I-D.dijk-core-sleepy-solutions]
Dijk, E., "Sleepy Devices using CoAP - Possible
Solutions", draft-dijk-core-sleepy-solutions-01 (work in
progress), June 2013.
[I-D.fossati-core-monitor-option]
Fossati, T., Giacomin, P., and S. Loreto, "Monitor Option
for CoAP", draft-fossati-core-monitor-option-00 (work in
progress), July 2012.
[I-D.fossati-core-publish-option]
Fossati, T., Giacomin, P., and S. Loreto, "Publish Option
for CoAP", draft-fossati-core-publish-option-00 (work in
progress), July 2012.
[I-D.giacomin-core-sleepy-option]
Fossati, T., Giacomin, P., Loreto, S., and M. Rossini,
"Sleepy Option for CoAP", draft-giacomin-core-sleepy-
option-00 (work in progress), February 2012.
[I-D.ietf-core-coap]
Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP)", draft-ietf-core-coap-18
(work in progress), June 2013.
[I-D.ietf-core-resource-directory]
Shelby, Z., Krco, S., and C. Bormann, "CoRE Resource
Directory", draft-ietf-core-resource-directory-00 (work in
progress), June 2013.
Rahman Expires April 14, 2014 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Sleepy Devices for CORE October 2013
[I-D.rahman-core-sleeping]
Rahman, A., Zuniga, J., and G. Lu, "Sleeping and Multicast
Considerations for CoAP", draft-rahman-core-sleeping-00
(work in progress), June 2010.
[I-D.rahman-core-sleepy-problem-statement]
Rahman, A., Fossati, T., Loreto, S., and M. Vial, "Sleepy
Devices in CoAP - Problem Statement", draft-rahman-core-
sleepy-problem-statement-01 (work in progress), October
2012.
[I-D.rahman-core-sleepy]
Rahman, A., "Enhanced Sleepy Node Support for CoAP",
draft-rahman-core-sleepy-04 (work in progress), October
2013.
[I-D.vial-core-mirror-server]
Vial, M., "CoRE Mirror Server", draft-vial-core-mirror-
server-01 (work in progress), April 2013.
[IETF87-Poll]
Rahman, A., "Do we need a CORE charter item for CoAP
support of Sleepy Nodes?", August 2013, <http://
www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/core/current/msg04750.html>.
[RFC6690] Shelby, Z., "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Link
Format", RFC 6690, August 2012.
Author's Address
Akbar Rahman
InterDigital Communications, LLC
Montreal, Quebec H3A 3G4
Canada
Phone: +1-514-585-0761
Email: akbar.rahman@interdigital.com
Rahman Expires April 14, 2014 [Page 6]