draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-13.txt | draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-14.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
6lo P. Thubert, Ed. | 6lo P. Thubert, Ed. | |||
Internet-Draft cisco | Internet-Draft cisco | |||
Updates: 6775 (if approved) E. Nordmark | Updates: 6775 (if approved) E. Nordmark | |||
Intended status: Standards Track Zededa | Intended status: Standards Track Zededa | |||
Expires: August 26, 2018 S. Chakrabarti | Expires: August 27, 2018 S. Chakrabarti | |||
Verizon | Verizon | |||
C. Perkins | C. Perkins | |||
Futurewei | Futurewei | |||
February 22, 2018 | February 23, 2018 | |||
An Update to 6LoWPAN ND | Registration Extensions for 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery | |||
draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-13 | draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-14 | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
This specification updates RFC 6775 - 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery, to | This specification updates RFC 6775 - 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery, to | |||
clarify the role of the protocol as a registration technique, | clarify the role of the protocol as a registration technique, | |||
simplify the registration operation in 6LoWPAN routers, as well as to | simplify the registration operation in 6LoWPAN routers, as well as to | |||
provide enhancements to the registration capabilities and mobility | provide enhancements to the registration capabilities and mobility | |||
detection for different network topologies including the backbone | detection for different network topologies including the backbone | |||
routers performing proxy Neighbor Discovery in a low power network. | routers performing proxy Neighbor Discovery in a low power network. | |||
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶ | |||
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 26, 2018. | This Internet-Draft will expire on August 27, 2018. | |||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
3. Applicability of Address Registration Options . . . . . . . . 5 | 3. Applicability of Address Registration Options . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
4. Updating RFC 6775 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 4. Updating RFC 6775 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
4.1. Extended Address Registration Option (EARO) . . . . . . . 7 | 4.1. Extended Address Registration Option (EARO) . . . . . . . 6 | |||
4.2. Transaction ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 4.2. Transaction ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
4.2.1. Comparing TID values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 4.2.1. Comparing TID values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
4.3. Registration Unique ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 4.3. Registration Unique ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
4.4. Extended Duplicate Address Messages . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 4.4. Extended Duplicate Address Messages . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
4.5. Registering the Target Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 4.5. Registering the Target Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
4.6. Link-Local Addresses and Registration . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 4.6. Link-Local Addresses and Registration . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
4.7. Maintaining the Registration States . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 4.7. Maintaining the Registration States . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
5. Detecting Enhanced ARO Capability Support . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 5. Detecting Enhanced ARO Capability Support . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
6. Extended ND Options And Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 6. Extended ND Options And Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
6.1. Enhanced Address Registration Option (EARO) . . . . . . . 14 | 6.1. Enhanced Address Registration Option (EARO) . . . . . . . 14 | |||
6.2. Extended Duplicate Address Message Formats . . . . . . . 16 | 6.2. Extended Duplicate Address Message Formats . . . . . . . 17 | |||
6.3. New 6LoWPAN Capability Bits in the Capability Indication | 6.3. New 6LoWPAN Capability Bits in the Capability Indication | |||
Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
7. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 7. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
7.1. Discovering the capabilities of an ND peer . . . . . . . 18 | 7.1. Discovering the capabilities of an ND peer . . . . . . . 19 | |||
7.1.1. Using the "E" Flag in the 6CIO . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 7.1.1. Using the "E" Flag in the 6CIO . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
7.1.2. Using the "T" Flag in the EARO . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 7.1.2. Using the "T" Flag in the EARO . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
7.2. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 7.2. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
7.3. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Router . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 7.3. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Router . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
7.4. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Border Router . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 7.4. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Border Router . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
9. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 9. Privacy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
10.1. ARO Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 10.1. ARO Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
10.2. ICMP Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 10.2. ICMP Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
10.3. New ARO Status values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 10.3. New ARO Status values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
10.4. New 6LoWPAN capability Bits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 10.4. New 6LoWPAN capability Bits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | |||
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
12.3. External Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 | 12.3. External Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | |||
Appendix A. Applicability and Requirements Served . . . . . . . 30 | Appendix A. Applicability and Requirements Served . . . . . . . 31 | |||
Appendix B. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | Appendix B. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 | |||
B.1. Requirements Related to Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 | B.1. Requirements Related to Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 | |||
B.2. Requirements Related to Routing Protocols . . . . . . . . 32 | B.2. Requirements Related to Routing Protocols . . . . . . . . 33 | |||
B.3. Requirements Related to the Variety of Low-Power Link | B.3. Requirements Related to the Variety of Low-Power Link | |||
types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 | types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 | |||
B.4. Requirements Related to Proxy Operations . . . . . . . . 34 | B.4. Requirements Related to Proxy Operations . . . . . . . . 35 | |||
B.5. Requirements Related to Security . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 | B.5. Requirements Related to Security . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 | |||
B.6. Requirements Related to Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . 35 | B.6. Requirements Related to Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . 36 | |||
B.7. Requirements Related to Operations and Management . . . . 36 | B.7. Requirements Related to Operations and Management . . . . 37 | |||
B.8. Matching Requirements with Specifications . . . . . . . . 36 | B.8. Matching Requirements with Specifications . . . . . . . . 38 | |||
Appendix C. Subset of a 6LoWPAN Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 | Appendix C. Subset of a 6LoWPAN Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 | |||
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 | |||
1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
The scope of this draft is an IPv6 Low Power Networks including star | The scope of this draft is an IPv6 Low Power Network including star | |||
and mesh topologies. This specification modifies and extends the | and mesh topologies. This specification modifies and extends the | |||
behavior and protocol elements of "Neighbor Discovery Optimization | behavior and protocol elements of "Neighbor Discovery Optimization | |||
for IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks" (6LoWPAN ND) | for IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks" (6LoWPAN ND) | |||
[RFC6775] to enable additional capabilities and enhancements such as: | [RFC6775] to enable additional capabilities and enhancements such as: | |||
o Support for indicating mobility vs retry (T-bit) | o determining the freshest location in case of mobility (T-bit) | |||
o Simplify the registration flow for link-local addresses | o Simplifying the registration flow for link-local addresses | |||
o Enhancement to Address Registration Option (ARO) | o Support of a Leaf node in a route-over network | |||
o Permitting registration of a target address | o Proxy registration in a route-over network | |||
o Clarification of support of privacy and temporary addresses | o Registration to a IPv6 ND proxy over a Backbone Link | |||
o Clarification of support for privacy and temporary addresses | ||||
The applicability of 6LoWPAN ND registration is discussed in | ||||
Section 3, and new extensions and updates to [RFC6775] are presented | ||||
in Section 4. Considerations on Backward Compatibility, Security and | ||||
Privacy are also elaborated upon in Section 7, Section 8 and in | ||||
Section 9, respectively. | ||||
2. Terminology | 2. Terminology | |||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. | document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. | |||
The Terminology used in this document is consistent with and | The Terminology used in this document is consistent with and | |||
incorporates that described in Terms Used in Routing for Low-Power | incorporates that described in Terms Used in Routing for Low-Power | |||
and Lossy Networks (LLNs). [RFC7102]. | and Lossy Networks (LLNs). [RFC7102]. | |||
Other terms in use in LLNs are found in Terminology for Constrained- | Other terms in use in LLNs are found in Terminology for Constrained- | |||
Node Networks [RFC7228]. | Node Networks [RFC7228]. | |||
A glossary of some classical 6LoWPAN acronyms such as ARO, 6LN, 6LBR | ||||
and 6CIO is given in Appendix C. | ||||
Readers are expected to be familiar with all the terms and concepts | Readers are expected to be familiar with all the terms and concepts | |||
that are discussed in | that are discussed in | |||
o "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6" [RFC4861], | o "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6" [RFC4861], | |||
o "IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration" [RFC4862], | o "IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration" [RFC4862], | |||
o "Problem Statement and Requirements for IPv6 over Low-Power | o "Problem Statement and Requirements for IPv6 over Low-Power | |||
Wireless Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN) Routing" [RFC6606], | Wireless Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN) Routing" [RFC6606], | |||
o "IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs): | o "IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs): | |||
Overview, Assumptions, Problem Statement, and Goals" [RFC4919], | Overview, Assumptions, Problem Statement, and Goals" [RFC4919] and | |||
o "Neighbor Discovery Optimization for Low-power and Lossy Networks" | o "Neighbor Discovery Optimization for Low-power and Lossy Networks" | |||
[RFC6775] and | [RFC6775]. | |||
o "Multi-link Subnet Support in IPv6" | ||||
[I-D.ietf-ipv6-multilink-subnets], | ||||
as well as the following terminology: | as well as the following terminology: | |||
Backbone Link: An IPv6 transit link that interconnects two or more | Backbone Link: An IPv6 transit link that interconnects two or more | |||
Backbone Routers. It is expected to be of high speed compared | Backbone Routers. It is expected to be of high speed compared | |||
to the LLN in order to carry the traffic that is required to | to the LLN in order to carry the traffic that is required to | |||
federate multiple segments of the potentially large LLN into a | federate multiple segments of the potentially large LLN into a | |||
single IPv6 subnet. | single IPv6 subnet. | |||
Backbone Router: A logical network function in an IPv6 router that | Backbone Router: A logical network function in an IPv6 router that | |||
federates a LLN over a Backbone Link. In order to do so, the | federates a LLN over a Backbone Link. In order to do so, the | |||
Backbone Router (6BBR) proxies the 6LoWPAN ND operations | Backbone Router (6BBR) proxies the 6LoWPAN ND operations | |||
detailed in the document onto the matching operations that run | detailed in this document onto the matching operations that run | |||
over the backbone, typically IPv6 ND. Note that 6BBR is a | over the backbone, typically IPv6 ND. Note that 6BBR is a | |||
logical function, just like 6LR and 6LBR, and that a same | logical function, just like 6LR and 6LBR, and that the same | |||
physical router may operate all three. | physical router may operate all three. | |||
Extended LLN: The aggregation of multiple LLNs as defined in | Extended LLN: The aggregation of multiple LLNs as defined in | |||
[RFC4919], interconnected by a Backbone Link via Backbone | [RFC4919], interconnected by a Backbone Link via Backbone | |||
Routers, and forming a single IPv6 MultiLink Subnet. | Routers, and forming a single IPv6 MultiLink Subnet. | |||
Registration: The process during which a 6LN registers its | Registration: The process during which a 6LN registers its | |||
address(es) with the Border Router so the 6BBR can serve as | address(es) with the Border Router so the 6BBR can serve as | |||
proxy for ND operations over the Backbone. | proxy for ND operations over the Backbone. | |||
Binding: The association between an IP address with a MAC address, a | Binding: The association between an IP address and a MAC address, a | |||
port and/or other information about the node that owns the IP | port and/or other information about the node that owns the IP | |||
address. | address. | |||
Registered Node: The node for which the registration is performed, | Registered Node: The node for which the registration is performed, | |||
and which owns the fields in the EARO option. | and which owns the fields in the Extended ARO option. | |||
Registering Node: The node that performs the registration to the | Registering Node: The node that performs the registration to the | |||
6BBR, which may proxy for the registered node. | 6BBR, which may proxy for the registered node. | |||
Registered Address: An address owned by the Registered Node node | Registered Address: An address owned by the Registered Node that was | |||
that was or is being registered. | or is being registered. | |||
RFC6775-only: Applied to a type of node or a type of message, this | RFC6775-only: Applied to a type of node or a type of message, this | |||
adjective indicates a behavior that is strictly as specified by | adjective indicates a behavior that is strictly as specified by | |||
[RFC6775] as opposed to updated with this specification. | [RFC6775] as opposed to updated with this specification. | |||
updated: a 6LN, a 6LR or a 6LBR that supports this specification. | updated: Qualifies a 6LN, a 6LR or a 6LBR that supports this | |||
specification. | ||||
3. Applicability of Address Registration Options | 3. Applicability of Address Registration Options | |||
The purpose of the Address Registration Option (ARO) in [RFC6775] is | The purpose of the Address Registration Option (ARO) in [RFC6775] is | |||
to facilitate duplicate address detection (DAD) for hosts as well as | to facilitate duplicate address detection (DAD) for hosts as well as | |||
populate Neighbor Cache Entries (NCE) [RFC4861] in the routers. This | to populate Neighbor Cache Entries (NCEs) [RFC4861] in the routers. | |||
reduces the reliance on multicast operations, which are often as | ||||
This reduces the reliance on multicast operations, which are often as | ||||
intrusive as broadcast, in IPv6 ND operations. | intrusive as broadcast, in IPv6 ND operations. | |||
With this specification, a failed or useless registration can be | With this specification, a failed or useless registration can be | |||
detected by a 6LR or a 6LBR for reasons other than address | detected by a 6LR or a 6LBR for reasons other than address | |||
duplication. Examples include: the router having run out of space; a | duplication. Examples include: the router having run out of space; a | |||
registration bearing a stale sequence number perhaps denoting a | registration bearing a stale sequence number perhaps denoting a | |||
movement of the host after the registration was placed; a host | movement of the host after the registration was placed; a host | |||
misbehaving and attempting to register an invalid address such as the | misbehaving and attempting to register an invalid address such as the | |||
unspecified address [RFC4291]; or a host using an address which is | unspecified address [RFC4291]; or a host using an address that is not | |||
not topologically correct on that link. | topologically correct on that link. | |||
In such cases the host will receive an error to help diagnose the | In such cases the host will receive an error to help diagnose the | |||
issue and may retry, possibly with a different address, and possibly | issue and may retry, possibly with a different address, and possibly | |||
registering to a different router, depending on the returned error. | registering to a different router, depending on the returned error. | |||
The ability to return errors to address registrations is not intended | The ability to return errors to address registrations is not intended | |||
to be used to restrict the ability of hosts to form and use multiple | to be used to restrict the ability of hosts to form and use multiple | |||
addresses, as recommended in "Host Address Availability | addresses. Rather, the intention is to conform to "Host Address | |||
Recommendations" [RFC7934]. | Availability Recommendations" [RFC7934]. | |||
In particular, the freedom to form and register addresses is needed | In particular, the freedom to form and register addresses is needed | |||
for enhanced privacy; each host may register a number of addresses | for enhanced privacy; each host may register a number of addresses | |||
using mechanisms such as "Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address | using mechanisms such as "Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address | |||
Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) in IPv6" [RFC4941]. | Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) in IPv6" [RFC4941]. | |||
In IPv6 ND [RFC4861], a router must have enough storage to hold | In IPv6 ND [RFC4861], a router needs enough storage to hold NCEs for | |||
neighbor cache entries for all the addresses to which it may forward. | all the addresses to which it can currently forward packets. A | |||
A router using the Address Registration mechanism also needs enough | router using the Address Registration mechanism also needs enough | |||
storage to hold NCEs for all the addresses that may be registered to | storage to hold NCEs for all the addresses that may be registered to | |||
it, regardless of whether or not they are actively communicating. | it, regardless of whether or not they are actively communicating. | |||
The number of registrations supported by a 6LoWPAN Router (6LR) or | The number of registrations supported by a 6LoWPAN Router (6LR) or | |||
6LoWPAN Border Router (6LBR) must be clearly documented. | 6LoWPAN Border Router (6LBR) MUST be clearly documented by the vendor | |||
and the dynamic use of associated resources SHOULD be made available | ||||
to the network operator, e.g. to a management console. | ||||
A network administrator should deploy updated 6LR/6LBRs to support | A network administrator MUST deploy updated 6LR/6LBRs to support the | |||
the number and type of devices in their network, based on the number | number and type of devices in their network, based on the number of | |||
of IPv6 addresses that those devices require and their address | IPv6 addresses that those devices require and their address renewal | |||
renewal rate and behavior. | rate and behavior. | |||
4. Updating RFC 6775 | 4. Updating RFC 6775 | |||
This specification introduces the Extended Address Registration | This specification introduces the Extended Address Registration | |||
Option (EARO) based on the ARO as defined [RFC6775]; in particular a | Option (EARO) based on the ARO as defined [RFC6775]; in particular a | |||
"T" flag is added that MUST be set in NS messages when this | "T" flag is added that MUST be set in NS messages when this | |||
specification is used, and echoed in NA messages to confirm that the | specification is used, and echoed in NA messages to confirm that the | |||
protocol is supported. | protocol is supported. | |||
The extensions to the ARO option are used in the Duplicate Address | The extensions to the ARO option are used in the Duplicate Address | |||
Request (DAR) and Duplicate Address Confirmation (DAC) messages, so | Request (DAR) and Duplicate Address Confirmation (DAC) messages, so | |||
as to convey the additional information all the way to the 6LBR. In | as to convey the additional information all the way to the 6LBR. In | |||
turn the 6LBR may proxy the registration using IPv6 ND over a | turn the 6LBR may proxy the registration using IPv6 ND over a | |||
Backbone Link as illustrated in Figure 1. Note that this | Backbone Link as illustrated in Figure 1. Note that this | |||
specification avoids the extended DAR flow for Link Local Addresses | specification avoids the extended DAR flow for Link Local Addresses | |||
in a Route-Over [RFC6606] mesh. | in a Route-Over [RFC6606] topology. | |||
6LN 6LR 6LBR 6BBR | 6LN 6LR 6LBR 6BBR | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| NS(EARO) | | | | | NS(EARO) | | | | |||
|--------------->| | | | |--------------->| | | | |||
| | Extended DAR | | | | | Extended DAR | | | |||
| |-------------->| | | | |-------------->| | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
| | | proxy NS(EARO) | | | | | proxy NS(EARO) | | |||
| | |--------------->| | | | |--------------->| | |||
skipping to change at page 6, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 38 ¶ | |||
| | Extended DAC | | | | | Extended DAC | | | |||
| |<--------------| | | | |<--------------| | | |||
| NA(EARO) | | | | | NA(EARO) | | | | |||
|<---------------| | | | |<---------------| | | | |||
| | | | | | | | | | |||
Figure 1: (Re-)Registration Flow | Figure 1: (Re-)Registration Flow | |||
In order to support various types of link layers, it is RECOMMENDED | In order to support various types of link layers, it is RECOMMENDED | |||
to allow multiple registrations, including for privacy / temporary | to allow multiple registrations, including for privacy / temporary | |||
addresses, and provide new mechanisms to help clean up stale | addresses. It is also RECOMMENDED to provide new mechanisms to help | |||
registration states as soon as possible. | clean up stale registration state as soon as possible. | |||
Section 5 of [RFC6775] specifies how a 6LN bootstraps an interface | Section 5 of [RFC6775] specifies how a 6LN bootstraps an interface | |||
and locates available 6LRs; a Registering Node SHOULD prefer | and locates available 6LRs; a Registering Node SHOULD prefer | |||
registering to a 6LR that is found to support this specification, as | registering to a 6LR that is found to support this specification, as | |||
discussed in Section 7.1, over a RFC6775-only one. | discussed in Section 7.1, over an RFC6775-only one. | |||
4.1. Extended Address Registration Option (EARO) | 4.1. Extended Address Registration Option (EARO) | |||
The Extended ARO (EARO) deprecates the ARO and is backward compatible | The Extended ARO (EARO) replaces the ARO and is backward compatible | |||
with it. More details on backward compatibility can be found in | with it. More details on backward compatibility can be found in | |||
Section 7. | Section 7. | |||
The semantics of the ARO are modified as follows: | The semantics of the ARO are modified as follows: | |||
o The address that is being registered with a Neighbor Solicitation | o The address that is being registered with a Neighbor Solicitation | |||
(NS) with an EARO is now the Target Address, as opposed to the | (NS) with an EARO is now the Target Address, as opposed to the | |||
Source Address as specified in [RFC6775] (see Section 4.5). This | Source Address as specified in [RFC6775] (see Section 4.5). This | |||
change enables a 6LBR to use one of its addresses as source to the | change enables a 6LBR to use one of its addresses as source to the | |||
proxy-registration of an address that belongs to a LLN Node to a | proxy-registration of an address that belongs to a LLN Node to a | |||
6BBR. This also limits the use of an address as source address | 6BBR. This also limits the use of an address as source address | |||
before it is registered and the associated DAD process is | before it is registered and the associated DAD process is | |||
complete. | complete. | |||
o The Unique ID in the EARO Option is not required to be a MAC | o The Unique ID in the EARO Option is not required to be a MAC | |||
address (see Section 4.3). | address (see Section 4.3). | |||
o This document specifies a new flag in the EARO option, the 'R' | ||||
flag, used by a 6LN, when registering, to indicate that this 6LN | ||||
is not a router and that it will not handle its own reachability. | ||||
If the 'R' flag is set, the registering node expects that the 6LR | ||||
ensures reachability for the registered address by means of | ||||
routing or proxying ND. A host SHOULD set the 'R' flag. When not | ||||
set, the 'R' flag indicates that the Registering Node is a router, | ||||
which for instance participates to a route-over routing protocol | ||||
such as RPL [RFC6550], and which will take care of injecting the | ||||
address over the routing protocol by itself. A router SHOULD NOT | ||||
set the 'R' flag. | ||||
o The specification introduces a Transaction ID (TID) field in the | o The specification introduces a Transaction ID (TID) field in the | |||
EARO (see Section 4.2). The TID MUST be provided by a node that | EARO (see Section 4.2). The TID MUST be provided by a node that | |||
supports this specification and a new "T" flag MUST be set to | supports this specification and a new "T" flag MUST be set to | |||
indicate so. | indicate so. | |||
o Finally, this specification introduces new status codes to help | o Finally, this specification introduces new status codes to help | |||
diagnose the cause of a registration failure (see Table 1). | diagnose the cause of a registration failure (see Table 1). | |||
4.2. Transaction ID | 4.2. Transaction ID | |||
The Transaction ID (TID) is a sequence number that is incremented | The Transaction ID (TID) is a sequence number that is incremented | |||
with each re-registration. The TID is used to detect the freshness | with each re-registration. The TID is used to detect the freshness | |||
of the registration request and useful to detect one single | of the registration request and to detect one single registration by | |||
registration by multiple 6LoWPAN border routers (e.g., 6LBRs and | multiple 6LoWPAN border routers (e.g., 6LBRs and 6BBRs) supporting | |||
6BBRs) supporting the same 6LoWPAN. The TID may also be used by the | the same 6LoWPAN. The TID may also be used by the network to track | |||
network to track the sequence of movements of a node in order to | the sequence of movements of a node in order to route to the current | |||
route to the current (freshest known) location of a moving node. | (freshest known) location of a moving node. | |||
When a Registered Node is registered with multiple 6BBRs in parallel, | When a Registered Node is registered with multiple 6BBRs in parallel, | |||
the same TID SHOULD be used, to enable the 6BBRs to determine that | the same TID SHOULD be used. This enables the 6BBRs to determine | |||
the registrations are the same, and distinguish that situation from a | that the registrations are the same, and distinguish that situation | |||
movement. | from a movement (see section 4 of [I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router] and | |||
Section 4.7 below). | ||||
4.2.1. Comparing TID values | 4.2.1. Comparing TID values | |||
The TID is a sequence counter and its operation is the exact match of | The TID is a sequence counter and its operation is the exact match of | |||
the path sequence specified in RPL, the IPv6 Routing Protocol for | the path sequence specified in RPL, the IPv6 Routing Protocol for | |||
Low-Power and Lossy Networks [RFC6550] specification. | Low-Power and Lossy Networks [RFC6550] specification. | |||
In order to keep this document self-contained and yet compatible, the | In order to keep this document self-contained and yet compatible, the | |||
text below is an exact copy from section 7.2. "Sequence Counter | text below is an exact copy from section 7.2. "Sequence Counter | |||
Operation" of [RFC6550]. | Operation" of [RFC6550]. | |||
skipping to change at page 9, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 37 ¶ | |||
numbers are not comparable. | numbers are not comparable. | |||
4. If two sequence numbers are determined to be not comparable, i.e. | 4. If two sequence numbers are determined to be not comparable, i.e. | |||
the results of the comparison are not defined, then a node should | the results of the comparison are not defined, then a node should | |||
give precedence to the sequence number that was most recently | give precedence to the sequence number that was most recently | |||
incremented. Failing this, the node should select the sequence | incremented. Failing this, the node should select the sequence | |||
number in order to minimize the resulting changes to its own | number in order to minimize the resulting changes to its own | |||
state. | state. | |||
4.3. Registration Unique ID | 4.3. Registration Unique ID | |||
The Registration Unique ID (RUID) enables a duplicate address | The Registration Unique ID (RUID) generalizes the EUI-64 field of the | |||
registration to be distinguished from a double registration or a | ARO in [RFC6775]. It is unique to a registration and enables to | |||
movement. An ND message from the 6BBR over the Backbone Link that is | identify the tentative to register a duplicate address, which is | |||
proxied on behalf of a Registered Node must carry the most recent | characterized by a different RUID in the conflicting registrations | |||
EARO option seen for that node. A NS/NA with an EARO and a NS/NA | (more in Section 4.6) | |||
without a EARO thus represent different nodes; if they relate to a | ||||
same target then an address duplication is likely. | ||||
The Registration Unique ID in [RFC6775] is a EUI-64 globally unique | ||||
address configured at a Lower Layer, under the assumption that | ||||
duplicate EUI-64 addresses are avoided. | ||||
With this specification, the Registration Unique ID is allowed to be | With this specification, the Registration Unique ID is allowed to be | |||
extended to different types of identifier, as long as the type is | extended to different types of identifier, as long as the type is | |||
clearly indicated. For instance, the type can be a cryptographic | clearly indicated. For instance, the type can be a cryptographic | |||
string and used to prove the ownership of the registration as | string and used to prove the ownership of the registration as | |||
discussed in "Address Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-power and | discussed in "Address Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-power and | |||
Lossy Networks" [I-D.ietf-6lo-ap-nd]. In order to support the flows | Lossy Networks" [I-D.ietf-6lo-ap-nd]. In order to support the flows | |||
related to the proof of ownership, this specification introduces new | related to the proof of ownership, this specification introduces new | |||
status codes "Validation Requested" and "Validation Failed" in the | status codes "Validation Requested" and "Validation Failed" in the | |||
EARO. | EARO. | |||
skipping to change at page 10, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 19 ¶ | |||
4.4. Extended Duplicate Address Messages | 4.4. Extended Duplicate Address Messages | |||
In order to map the new EARO content in the DAR/DAC messages, a new | In order to map the new EARO content in the DAR/DAC messages, a new | |||
TID field is added to the Extended DAR (EDAR) and the Extended DAC | TID field is added to the Extended DAR (EDAR) and the Extended DAC | |||
(EDAC) messages as a replacement to a Reserved field, and an odd | (EDAC) messages as a replacement to a Reserved field, and an odd | |||
value of the ICMP Code indicates support for the TID, to transport | value of the ICMP Code indicates support for the TID, to transport | |||
the "T" flag. | the "T" flag. | |||
In order to prepare for future extensions, and though no option has | In order to prepare for future extensions, and though no option has | |||
been defined for the Duplicate Address messages, implementations | been defined for the Duplicate Address messages, implementations MUST | |||
SHOULD expect ND options after the main body, and SHOULD ignore them. | expect ND options after the main body, and MUST ignore them. | |||
As for the EARO, the Extended Duplicate Address messages are backward | As for the EARO, the Extended Duplicate Address messages are backward | |||
compatible with the RFC6775-only versions, and remarks concerning | compatible with the RFC6775-only versions, and remarks concerning | |||
backwards compatibility for the protocol between the 6LN and the 6LR | backwards compatibility for the protocol between the 6LN and the 6LR | |||
apply similarly between a 6LR and a 6LBR. | apply similarly between a 6LR and a 6LBR. | |||
4.5. Registering the Target Address | 4.5. Registering the Target Address | |||
The Registering Node is the node that performs the registration to | The Registering Node is the node that performs the registration to | |||
the 6BBR. As in [RFC6775], it may be the Registered Node as well, in | the 6BBR. As in [RFC6775], it may be the Registered Node as well, in | |||
which case it registers one of its own addresses, and indicates its | which case it registers one of its own addresses, and indicates its | |||
own MAC Address as Source Link Layer Address (SLLA) in the NS(EARO). | own MAC Address as Source Link Layer Address (SLLA) in the NS(EARO). | |||
This specification adds the capability to proxy the registration | This specification adds the capability to proxy the registration | |||
operation on behalf of a Registered Node that is reachable over a LLN | operation on behalf of a Registered Node that is reachable over a LLN | |||
mesh. In that case, if the Registered Node is reachable from the | mesh. In that case, if the Registered Node is reachable from the | |||
6BBR over a Mesh-Under mesh, the Registering Node indicates the MAC | 6BBR over a Mesh-Under mesh, the Registering Node indicates the MAC | |||
Address of the Registered Node as SLLA in the NS(EARO). If the | Address of the Registered Node as the SLLA in the NS(EARO). If the | |||
Registered Node is reachable over a Route-Over mesh from the | Registered Node is reachable over a Route-Over mesh from the | |||
Registering Node, the SLLA in the NS(ARO) is that of the Registering | Registering Node, the SLLA in the NS(ARO) is that of the Registering | |||
Node. This enables the Registering Node to attract the packets from | Node. This enables the Registering Node to attract the packets from | |||
the 6BBR and route them over the LLN to the Registered Node. | the 6BBR and route them over the LLN to the Registered Node. | |||
In order to enable the latter operation, this specification changes | In order to enable the latter operation, this specification changes | |||
the behavior of the 6LN and the 6LR so that the Registered Address is | the behavior of the 6LN and the 6LR so that the Registered Address is | |||
found in the Target Address field of the NS and NA messages as | found in the Target Address field of the NS and NA messages as | |||
opposed to the Source Address. With this convention, a TLLA option | opposed to the Source Address. With this convention, a TLLA option | |||
indicates the link-layer address of the 6LN that owns the address, | indicates the link-layer address of the 6LN that owns the address, | |||
skipping to change at page 11, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 19 ¶ | |||
RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN ND [RFC6775]. | RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN ND [RFC6775]. | |||
4.6. Link-Local Addresses and Registration | 4.6. Link-Local Addresses and Registration | |||
Considering that LLN nodes are often not wired and may move, there is | Considering that LLN nodes are often not wired and may move, there is | |||
no guarantee that a Link-Local address stays unique between a | no guarantee that a Link-Local address stays unique between a | |||
potentially variable and unbounded set of neighboring nodes. | potentially variable and unbounded set of neighboring nodes. | |||
Compared to [RFC6775], this specification only requires that a Link- | Compared to [RFC6775], this specification only requires that a Link- | |||
Local address is unique from the perspective of the two nodes that | Local address is unique from the perspective of the two nodes that | |||
use it to communicate (e.g. the 6LN and the 6LR in an NS/NA | use it to communicate (e.g., the 6LN and the 6LR in an NS/NA | |||
exchange). This simplifies the DAD process in Route-Over Mode for | exchange). This simplifies the DAD process in a Route-Over topology | |||
Link-Local addresses, and there is no exchange of Duplicate Address | for Link-Local addresses, by avoiding an exchange of Duplicate | |||
messages between the 6LR and a 6LBR for Link-Local addresses. | Address messages between the 6LR and a 6LBR for those addresses. | |||
In more details: | In more details: | |||
An exchange between two nodes using Link-Local addresses implies that | An exchange between two nodes using Link-Local addresses implies that | |||
they are reachable over one hop and that at least one of the 2 nodes | they are reachable over one hop and that at least one of the 2 nodes | |||
acts as a 6LR. A node MUST register a Link-Local address to a 6LR in | acts as a 6LR. A node MUST register a Link-Local address to a 6LR in | |||
order to obtain reachability from that 6LR beyond the current | order to obtain reachability from that 6LR beyond the current | |||
exchange, and in particular to use the Link-Local address as source | exchange, and in particular to use the Link-Local address as source | |||
address to register other addresses, e.g. global addresses. | address to register other addresses, e.g., global addresses. | |||
If there is no collision with an address previously registered to | If there is no collision with an address previously registered to | |||
this 6LR by another 6LN, then the Link-Local address is unique from | this 6LR by another 6LN, then the Link-Local address is unique from | |||
the standpoint of this 6LR and the registration is acceptable. | the standpoint of this 6LR and the registration is acceptable. | |||
Alternatively, two different 6LRs might expose the same Link-Local | Alternatively, two different 6LRs might expose the same Link-Local | |||
address but different link-layer addresses. In that case, a 6LN MUST | address but different link-layer addresses. In that case, a 6LN MUST | |||
only interact with at most one of the 6LRs. | only interact with at most one of the 6LRs. | |||
The DAD process between the 6LR and a 6LBR, which is based on an | The DAD process between the 6LR and a 6LBR, which is based on an | |||
exchange of Duplicate Address messages, does not need to take place | exchange of Duplicate Address messages, does not need to take place | |||
for Link-Local addresses. | for Link-Local addresses. | |||
When registering to a 6LR that conforms this specification, a node | When registering to a 6LR that conforms to this specification, a node | |||
MUST use a Link-Local address as the source address of the | MUST use a Link-Local address as the source address of the | |||
registration, whatever the type of IPv6 address that is being | registration, whatever the type of IPv6 address that is being | |||
registered. That Link-Local Address MUST be either an address that | registered. That Link-Local Address MUST be either an address that | |||
is already registered to the 6LR, or the address that is being | is already registered to the 6LR, or the address that is being | |||
registered. | registered. | |||
When a Registering Node does not have an already-Registered Address, | When a Registering Node does not have an already-Registered Address, | |||
it MUST register a Link-Local address, using it as both the Source | it MUST register a Link-Local address, using it as both the Source | |||
and the Target Address of an NS(EARO) message. In that case, it is | and the Target Address of an NS(EARO) message. In that case, it is | |||
RECOMMENDED to use a Link-Local address that is (expected to be) | RECOMMENDED to use a Link-Local address that is (expected to be) | |||
skipping to change at page 12, line 19 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 19 ¶ | |||
Since there is no Duplicate Address exchange for Link-Local | Since there is no Duplicate Address exchange for Link-Local | |||
addresses, the 6LR may answer immediately to the registration of a | addresses, the 6LR may answer immediately to the registration of a | |||
Link-Local address, based solely on its existing state and the Source | Link-Local address, based solely on its existing state and the Source | |||
Link-Layer Option that MUST be placed in the NS(EARO) message as | Link-Layer Option that MUST be placed in the NS(EARO) message as | |||
required in [RFC6775]. | required in [RFC6775]. | |||
A node needs to register its IPv6 Global Unicast IPv6 Addresses | A node needs to register its IPv6 Global Unicast IPv6 Addresses | |||
(GUAs) to a 6LR in order to establish global reachability for these | (GUAs) to a 6LR in order to establish global reachability for these | |||
addresses via that 6LR. When registering with an updated 6LR, a | addresses via that 6LR. When registering with an updated 6LR, a | |||
Registering Node does not use its GUA as Source Address, in contrast | Registering Node does not use a GUA as Source Address, in contrast to | |||
to a node that complies to [RFC6775]. For non-Link-Local addresses, | a node that complies to [RFC6775]. For non-Link-Local addresses, the | |||
the Duplicate Address exchange MUST conform to [RFC6775], but the | Duplicate Address exchange MUST conform to [RFC6775], but the | |||
extended formats described in this specification for the DAR and the | extended formats described in this specification for the DAR and the | |||
DAC are used to relay the extended information in the case of an | DAC are used to relay the extended information in the case of an | |||
EARO. | EARO. | |||
An ND message from the 6BBR over the Backbone Link that is proxied on | ||||
behalf of a Registered Node MUST carry the most recent EARO option | ||||
seen for that node. A NS/NA with an EARO and a NS/NA without a EARO | ||||
thus represent different nodes; this is considered as an address | ||||
duplication and the first owner wins. If the first owner is the | ||||
registration (i.e. with an NS(EARO)) then the 6BBR defends the | ||||
address over the Backbone Link as prescribed by [RFC4862]. If the | ||||
first owner is a node over the Backbone Link (no ARO), then the 6BBR | ||||
rejects the proxy-registration with a Status of "Duplicate Address". | ||||
4.7. Maintaining the Registration States | 4.7. Maintaining the Registration States | |||
This section discusses protocol actions that involve the Registering | This section discusses protocol actions that involve the Registering | |||
Node, the 6LR and the 6LBR. It must be noted that the portion that | Node, the 6LR and the 6LBR. It must be noted that the portion that | |||
deals with a 6LBR only applies to those addresses that are registered | deals with a 6LBR only applies to those addresses that are registered | |||
to it; as discussed in Section 4.6, this is not the case for Link- | to it; as discussed in Section 4.6, this is not the case for Link- | |||
Local addresses. The registration state includes all data that is | Local addresses. The registration state includes all data that is | |||
stored in the router relative to that registration, in particular, | stored in the router relative to that registration, in particular, | |||
but not limited to, an NCE in a 6LR. 6LBRs and 6BBRs may store | but not limited to, an NCE in a 6LR. 6LBRs and 6BBRs may store | |||
additional registration information in more complex data structures | additional registration information in more complex data structures | |||
and use protocols that are out of scope of this document to keep them | and use protocols that are out of scope of this document to keep them | |||
synchronized when they are distributed. | synchronized when they are distributed. | |||
When its Neighbor Cache is full, a 6LR cannot accept a new | When its resource available for Neighbor Cache Entries are exhausted, | |||
registration. In that situation, the EARO is returned in a NA | a 6LR cannot accept a new registration. In that situation, the EARO | |||
message with a Status of 2, and the Registering Node may attempt to | is returned in a NA message with a Status Code of "Neighbor Cache | |||
register to another 6LR. | Full", and the Registering Node may attempt to register to another | |||
6LR. | ||||
If the registry in the 6LBR is saturated, then the LBR cannot decide | If the registry in the 6LBR is saturated, then the LBR cannot decide | |||
whether a new address is a duplicate. In that case, the 6LBR replies | whether a new address is a duplicate. In that case, the 6LBR replies | |||
to a EDAR message with a EDAC message that carries a new Status Code | to a EDAR message with an EDAC message that carries a new Status Code | |||
indicating "6LBR Registry saturated" Table 1. Note: this code is | indicating "6LBR Registry saturated" Table 1. Note: this code is | |||
used by 6LBRs instead of Status 2 when responding to a Duplicate | used by 6LBRs instead of "Neighbor Cache Full" when responding to a | |||
Address message exchange and passed on to the Registering Node by the | Duplicate Address message exchange and is passed on to the | |||
6LR. There is no point for the node to retry this registration | Registering Node by the 6LR. There is no point for the node to retry | |||
immediately via another 6LR, since the problem is global to the | this registration immediately via another 6LR, since the problem is | |||
network. The node may either abandon that address, de-register other | global to the network. The node may either abandon that address, de- | |||
addresses first to make room, or keep the address in TENTATIVE state | register other addresses first to make room, or keep the address in | |||
and retry later. | TENTATIVE state and retry later. | |||
A node renews an existing registration by sending a new NS(EARO) | A node renews an existing registration by sending a new NS(EARO) | |||
message for the Registered Address. In order to refresh the | message for the Registered Address. In order to refresh the | |||
registration state in the 6LBR, the registration MUST be reported to | registration state in the 6LBR, the registration MUST be reported to | |||
the 6LBR. | the 6LBR. | |||
A node that ceases to use an address SHOULD attempt to de-register | A node that ceases to use an address SHOULD attempt to de-register | |||
that address from all the 6LRs to which it has registered the | that address from all the 6LRs to which it has registered the | |||
address, which is achieved using an NS(EARO) message with a | address, which is achieved using an NS(EARO) message with a | |||
Registration Lifetime of 0. | Registration Lifetime of 0. | |||
A node that moves away from a particular 6LR SHOULD attempt to de- | A node that moves away from a particular 6LR SHOULD attempt to de- | |||
register all of its addresses registered to that 6LR and register to | register all of its addresses registered to that 6LR and register to | |||
a new 6LR with an incremented TID. When/if the node shows up | a new 6LR with an incremented TID. When/if the node shows up | |||
elsewhere, an asynchronous NA(EARO) or EDAC message with a status of | elsewhere, an asynchronous NA(EARO) or EDAC message with a Status | |||
3 "Moved" SHOULD be used to clean up the state in the previous | Code of "Moved" SHOULD be used to clean up the state in the previous | |||
location. For instance, as described in | location. For instance, as described in | |||
[I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router], the "Moved" status can be used by a | [I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router], the "Moved" status can be used by a | |||
6BBR in a NA(EARO) message to indicate that the ownership of the | 6BBR in an NA(EARO) message to indicate that the ownership of the | |||
proxy state on the Backbone Link was transferred to another 6BBR, as | proxy state on the Backbone Link was transferred to another 6BBR, as | |||
the consequence of a movement of the device. The receiver of the | the consequence of a movement of the device. If the receiver of the | |||
message SHOULD propagate the status down the chain towards the | message has a state corresponding to the related address, it SHOULD | |||
Registered node (e.g. reversing an existing RPL [RFC6550] path) and | propagate the status down the forwarding path to the Registered node | |||
then clean up its state. | (e.g. reversing an existing RPL [RFC6550] path as prescribed in | |||
[I-D.ietf-roll-efficient-npdao]) and whether it could or not do so, | ||||
the receiver MUST clean up the said state. | ||||
Upon receiving a NS(EARO) message with a Registration Lifetime of 0 | Upon receiving an NS(EARO) message with a Registration Lifetime of 0 | |||
and determining that this EARO is the freshest for a given NCE (see | and determining that this EARO is the freshest for a given NCE (see | |||
Section 4.2), a 6LR cleans up its NCE. If the address was registered | Section 4.2), a 6LR cleans up its NCE. If the address was registered | |||
to the 6LBR, then the 6LR MUST report to the 6LBR, through a | to the 6LBR, then the 6LR MUST report to the 6LBR, through a | |||
Duplicate Address exchange with the 6LBR, indicating the null | Duplicate Address exchange with the 6LBR, indicating the null | |||
Registration Lifetime and the latest TID that this 6LR is aware of. | Registration Lifetime and the latest TID that this 6LR is aware of. | |||
Upon receiving the Extended DAR message, the 6LBR evaluates if this | Upon receiving the Extended DAR message, the 6LBR evaluates if this | |||
is the most recent TID it has received for that particular registry | is the most recent TID it has received for that particular registry | |||
entry. If so, then the entry is scheduled to be removed, and the | entry. If so, then the entry is scheduled to be removed, and the | |||
EDAR is answered with a EDAC message bearing a Status of 0 | EDAR is answered with an EDAC message bearing a Status of "Success". | |||
("Success"). Otherwise, a Status 3 ("Moved") is returned instead, | Otherwise, a Status Code of "Moved" is returned instead, and the | |||
and the existing entry is maintained. | existing entry is maintained. | |||
When an address is scheduled to be removed, the 6LBR SHOULD keep its | When an address is scheduled to be removed, the 6LBR SHOULD keep its | |||
entry in a DELAY state for a configurable period of time, so as to | entry in a DELAY state for a configurable period of time, so as to | |||
protect a mobile node that de-registered from one 6LR and did not | protect a mobile node that de-registered from one 6LR and did not | |||
register yet to a new one, or the new registration did not reach yet | register yet to a new one, or the new registration did not reach yet | |||
the 6LBR due to propagation delays in the network. Once the DELAY | the 6LBR due to propagation delays in the network. Once the DELAY | |||
time is passed, the 6LBR silently removes its entry. | time is passed, the 6LBR silently removes its entry. | |||
5. Detecting Enhanced ARO Capability Support | 5. Detecting Enhanced ARO Capability Support | |||
skipping to change at page 14, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 44 ¶ | |||
Advertisement (NA) messages. | Advertisement (NA) messages. | |||
6. Extended ND Options And Messages | 6. Extended ND Options And Messages | |||
This specification does not introduce new options, but it modifies | This specification does not introduce new options, but it modifies | |||
existing ones and updates the associated behaviors as specified in | existing ones and updates the associated behaviors as specified in | |||
the following subsections. | the following subsections. | |||
6.1. Enhanced Address Registration Option (EARO) | 6.1. Enhanced Address Registration Option (EARO) | |||
The Address Registration Option (ARO) is defined in section 4.1. of | The Address Registration Option (ARO) is defined in section 4.1 of | |||
[RFC6775]. | [RFC6775]. | |||
The Enhanced Address Registration Option (EARO) updates the ARO | The Enhanced Address Registration Option (EARO) updates the ARO | |||
option within Neighbor Discovery NS and NA messages between a 6LN and | option within Neighbor Discovery NS and NA messages between a 6LN and | |||
its 6LR. On the other hand, the Extended Duplicate Address messages, | its 6LR. On the other hand, the Extended Duplicate Address messages, | |||
EDAR and EDAC, replace the DAR and DAC messages so as to transport | EDAR and EDAC, replace the DAR and DAC messages so as to transport | |||
the new information between 6LRs and 6LBRs across LLN meshes such as | the new information between 6LRs and 6LBRs across LLN meshes such as | |||
6TiSCH networks. | 6TiSCH networks. | |||
An NS message with an EARO option is a registration if and only if it | An NS message with an EARO option is a registration if and only if it | |||
skipping to change at page 15, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 23 ¶ | |||
the Target Address field of the NS and NA messages. | the Target Address field of the NS and NA messages. | |||
The EARO extends the ARO and is indicated by the "T" flag set. The | The EARO extends the ARO and is indicated by the "T" flag set. The | |||
format of the EARO option is as follows: | format of the EARO option is as follows: | |||
0 1 2 3 | 0 1 2 3 | |||
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 | 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Type | Length = 2 | Status | Reserved | | | Type | Length = 2 | Status | Reserved | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Reserved |T| TID | Registration Lifetime | | | Reserved |R|T| TID | Registration Lifetime | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | | | | | |||
+ Registration Unique ID (EUI-64 or equivalent) + | + Registration Unique ID (EUI-64 or equivalent) + | |||
| | | | | | |||
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
Figure 2: EARO | Figure 2: EARO | |||
Option Fields | Option Fields | |||
skipping to change at page 16, line 14 ¶ | skipping to change at page 16, line 27 ¶ | |||
| | removed, for instance due to a movement of the device. | | | | removed, for instance due to a movement of the device. | | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
| 6 | Duplicate Source Address: The address used as source of | | | 6 | Duplicate Source Address: The address used as source of | | |||
| | the NS(ARO) conflicts with an existing registration. | | | | the NS(ARO) conflicts with an existing registration. | | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
| 7 | Invalid Source Address: The address used as source of the | | | 7 | Invalid Source Address: The address used as source of the | | |||
| | NS(ARO) is not a Link-Local address as prescribed by this | | | | NS(ARO) is not a Link-Local address as prescribed by this | | |||
| | document. | | | | document. | | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
| 8 | Registered Address topologically incorrect: The address | | | 8 | Registered Address topologically incorrect: The address | | |||
| | being registered is not usable on this link, e.g. it is | | | | being registered is not usable on this link, e.g., it is | | |||
| | not topologically correct | | | | not topologically correct | | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
| 9 | 6LBR Registry saturated: A new registration cannot be | | | 9 | 6LBR Registry saturated: A new registration cannot be | | |||
| | accepted because the 6LBR Registry is saturated. Note: | | | | accepted because the 6LBR Registry is saturated. Note: | | |||
| | this code is used by 6LBRs instead of Status 2 when | | | | this code is used by 6LBRs instead of Status 2 when | | |||
| | responding to a Duplicate Address message exchange and | | | | responding to a Duplicate Address message exchange and is | | |||
| | passed on to the Registering Node by the 6LR. | | | | passed on to the Registering Node by the 6LR. | | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
| 10 | Validation Failed: The proof of ownership of the | | | 10 | Validation Failed: The proof of ownership of the | | |||
| | registered address is not correct. | | | | registered address is not correct. | | |||
+-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | +-------+-----------------------------------------------------------+ | |||
Table 1: EARO Status | Table 1: EARO Status | |||
Reserved: This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero | Reserved: This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero | |||
by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. | by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. | |||
R: If the 'R' flag is set, the registering node expects | ||||
that the 6LR ensures reachability for the registered | ||||
address, e.g. by injecting the address in a route- | ||||
over routing protocol or proxying ND over a Backbone | ||||
Link. | ||||
T: One bit flag. Set if the next octet is used as a | T: One bit flag. Set if the next octet is used as a | |||
TID. | TID. | |||
TID: 1-byte integer; a transaction id that is maintained | TID: 1-byte integer; a transaction id that is maintained | |||
by the node and incremented with each transaction. | by the node and incremented with each transaction. | |||
The node SHOULD maintain the TID in a persistent | The node SHOULD maintain the TID in a persistent | |||
storage. | storage. | |||
Registration Lifetime: 16-bit integer; expressed in minutes. 0 | Registration Lifetime: 16-bit integer; expressed in minutes. 0 | |||
means that the registration has ended and the | means that the registration has ended and the | |||
associated state should be removed. | associated state should be removed. | |||
Registration Unique IDentifier (RUID): A globally unique identifier | Registration Unique IDentifier (RUID): A globally unique identifier | |||
for the node associated. This can be the EUI-64 | for the node associated. This can be the EUI-64 | |||
derived IID of an interface, or some provable ID | derived IID of an interface, or some provable ID | |||
skipping to change at page 18, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 19, line 24 ¶ | |||
If the Registering Node receives a 6CIO in a Router Advertisement | If the Registering Node receives a 6CIO in a Router Advertisement | |||
message, then the setting of the "E" Flag indicates whether or not | message, then the setting of the "E" Flag indicates whether or not | |||
this specification is supported. | this specification is supported. | |||
7.1.2. Using the "T" Flag in the EARO | 7.1.2. Using the "T" Flag in the EARO | |||
One alternate way for a 6LN to discover the router's capabilities is | One alternate way for a 6LN to discover the router's capabilities is | |||
to start by registering a Link Local address, placing the same | to start by registering a Link Local address, placing the same | |||
address in the Source and Target Address fields of the NS message, | address in the Source and Target Address fields of the NS message, | |||
and setting the "T" Flag. The node may for instance register an | and setting the "T" Flag. The node may for instance register an | |||
address that is based on EUI-64. For such an address, DAD is not | address that is based on an EUI-64. For such an address, DAD is not | |||
required and using the SLLAO option in the NS is actually more | required and using the SLLAO option in the NS is actually more | |||
consistent with existing ND specifications such as the "Optimistic | consistent with existing ND specifications such as the "Optimistic | |||
Duplicate Address Detection (ODAD) for IPv6" [RFC4429]. | Duplicate Address Detection (ODAD) for IPv6" [RFC4429]. | |||
Once its first registration is complete, the node knows from the | Once its first registration is complete, the node knows from the | |||
setting of the "T" Flag in the response whether the router supports | setting of the "T" Flag in the response whether the router supports | |||
this specification. If support is verified, the node may register | this specification. If support is verified, the node may register | |||
other addresses that it owns, or proxy-register addresses on behalf | other addresses that it owns, or proxy-register addresses on behalf | |||
some another node, indicating those addresses being registered in the | of some another node, indicating those addresses being registered in | |||
Target Address field of the NS messages, while using one of its own | the Target Address field of the NS messages, while using one of its | |||
previously registered addresses as source. | own previously registered addresses as source. | |||
A node that supports this specification MUST always use an EARO as a | A node that supports this specification MUST always use an EARO as a | |||
replacement to an ARO in its registration to a router. This is | replacement to an ARO in its registration to a router. This is | |||
harmless since the "T" flag and TID field are reserved in [RFC6775], | harmless since the "T" flag and TID field are reserved in [RFC6775], | |||
and are ignored by a RFC6775-only router. A router that supports | and are ignored by an RFC6775-only router. A router that supports | |||
this specification answers an ARO with an ARO and answers an EARO | this specification answers an ARO with an ARO and answers an EARO | |||
with an EARO. | with an EARO. | |||
This specification changes the behavior of the peers in a | This specification changes the behavior of the peers in a | |||
registration flow. To enable backward compatibility, a 6LN that | registration flow. To enable backward compatibility, a 6LN that | |||
registers to a 6LR that is not known to support this specification | registers to a 6LR that is not known to support this specification | |||
MUST behave in a manner that is compatible with [RFC6775]. A 6LN can | MUST behave in a manner that is compatible with [RFC6775]. A 6LN can | |||
achieve that by sending a NS(EARO) message with a Link-Local Address | achieve that by sending a NS(EARO) message with a Link-Local Address | |||
used as both Source and Target Address, as described in Section 4.6. | used as both Source and Target Address, as described in Section 4.6. | |||
Once the 6LR is known to support this specification, the 6LN MUST | Once the 6LR is known to support this specification, the 6LN MUST | |||
obey this specification. | obey this specification. | |||
7.2. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Node | 7.2. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Node | |||
A RFC6775-only 6LN will use the Registered Address as source and will | an RFC6775-only 6LN will use the Registered Address as source and | |||
not use an EARO option. An updated 6LR MUST accept that registration | will not use an EARO option. An updated 6LR MUST accept that | |||
if it is valid per [RFC6775], and it MUST manage the binding cache | registration if it is valid per [RFC6775], and it MUST manage the | |||
accordingly. The updated 6LR MUST then use the RFC6775-only | binding cache accordingly. The updated 6LR MUST then use the | |||
Duplicate Address messages as specified in [RFC6775] to indicate to | RFC6775-only Duplicate Address messages as specified in [RFC6775] to | |||
the 6LBR that the TID is not present in the messages. | indicate to the 6LBR that the TID is not present in the messages. | |||
The main difference with [RFC6775] is that Duplicate Address exchange | The main difference from [RFC6775] is that the Duplicate Address | |||
for DAD is avoided for Link-Local addresses. In any case, the 6LR | exchange for DAD is avoided for Link-Local addresses. In any case, | |||
SHOULD use an EARO in the reply, and may use any of the Status codes | the 6LR SHOULD use an EARO in the reply, and can use any of the | |||
defined in this specification. | Status codes defined in this specification. | |||
7.3. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Router | 7.3. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Router | |||
The first registration by an updated 6LN MUST be for a Link-Local | The first registration by an updated 6LN MUST be for a Link-Local | |||
address, using that Link-Local address as source. A RFC6775-only 6LR | address, using that Link-Local address as source. an RFC6775-only 6LR | |||
will not make a difference and treat that registration as if the 6LN | will treat that registration as if the 6LN was an RFC6775-only node. | |||
was a RFC6775-only node. | ||||
An updated 6LN will always use an EARO option in the registration NS | An updated 6LN will always use an EARO option in the registration NS | |||
message, whereas a RFC6775-only 6LR will always reply with an ARO | message, whereas an RFC6775-only 6LR will always reply with an ARO | |||
option in the NA message. From that first registration, the updated | option in the NA message. From that first registration, the updated | |||
6LN can determine whether or not the 6LR supports this specification. | 6LN can determine whether or not the 6LR supports this specification. | |||
After detecting a RFC6775-only 6LR, an updated 6LN SHOULD attempt to | After detecting an RFC6775-only 6LR, an updated 6LN SHOULD attempt to | |||
find an alternate 6LR that is updated for a reasonable time that | find an alternate 6LR that is updated for a reasonable time that | |||
depends on the type of device and the expected deployment. | depends on the type of device and the expected deployment. | |||
An updated 6LN SHOULD use an EARO in the request regardless of the | An updated 6LN SHOULD use an EARO in the request regardless of the | |||
type of 6LR, RFC6775-only or updated, which implies that the "T" flag | type of 6LR, RFC6775-only or updated, which implies that the "T" flag | |||
is set. | is set. | |||
If an updated 6LN moves from an updated 6LR to a RFC6775-only 6LR, | If an updated 6LN moves from an updated 6LR to an RFC6775-only 6LR, | |||
the RFC6775-only 6LR will send a RFC6775-only DAR message, which can | the RFC6775-only 6LR will send an RFC6775-only DAR message, which can | |||
not be compared with an updated one for freshness. | not be compared with an updated one for freshness. | |||
Allowing RFC6775-only DAR messages to replace a state established by | Allowing RFC6775-only DAR messages to replace a state established by | |||
the updated protocol in the 6LBR would be an attack vector and that | the updated protocol in the 6LBR would be an attack vector and that | |||
cannot be the default behavior. | cannot be the default behavior. | |||
But if RFC6775-only and updated 6LRs coexist temporarily in a | But if RFC6775-only and updated 6LRs coexist temporarily in a | |||
network, then it makes sense for an administrator to install a policy | network, then it makes sense for an administrator to install a policy | |||
that allows so, and the capability to install such a policy should be | that allows so, and the capability to install such a policy should be | |||
configurable in a 6LBR though it is out of scope for this document. | configurable in a 6LBR though it is out of scope for this document. | |||
7.4. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Border Router | 7.4. RFC6775-only 6LoWPAN Border Router | |||
With this specification, the Duplicate Address messages are extended | With this specification, the Duplicate Address messages are extended | |||
to transport the EARO information. Similarly to the NS/NA exchange, | to transport the EARO information. Similarly to the NS/NA exchange, | |||
updated 6LBR devices always use the Extended Duplicate Address | updated 6LBR devices always use the Extended Duplicate Address | |||
messages and all the associated behavior so they can always be | messages and all the associated behavior so they can always be | |||
differentiated from RFC6775-only ones. | differentiated from RFC6775-only ones. | |||
Note that a RFC6775-only 6LBR will accept and process an EDAR message | Note that an RFC6775-only 6LBR will accept and process an EDAR | |||
as if it was a RFC6775-only DAR, so the support of DAD is preserved. | message as if it were an RFC6775-only DAR, so the support of DAD is | |||
preserved. | ||||
8. Security Considerations | 8. Security Considerations | |||
This specification extends [RFC6775], and the security section of | This specification extends [RFC6775], and the security section of | |||
that standard also applies to this as well. In particular, it is | that standard also applies to this as well. In particular, it is | |||
expected that the link layer is sufficiently protected to prevent a | expected that the link layer is sufficiently protected to prevent a | |||
rogue access, either by means of physical or IP security on the | rogue access, either by means of physical or IP security on the | |||
Backbone Link and link layer cryptography on the LLN. | Backbone Link and link layer cryptography on the LLN. | |||
This specification also expects that the LLN MAC provides secure | This specification also expects that the LLN MAC provides secure | |||
unicast to/from the Backbone Router and secure Broadcast from the | unicast to/from the Backbone Router and secure Broadcast or Multicast | |||
Backbone Router in a way that prevents tampering with or replaying | from the Backbone Router in a way that prevents tampering with or | |||
the RA messages. | replaying the RA messages. | |||
This specification recommends using privacy techniques (see | This specification recommends using privacy techniques (see | |||
Section 9), and protection against address theft such as provided by | Section 9), and protection against address theft such as provided by | |||
"Address Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-power and Lossy | "Address Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-power and Lossy | |||
Networks" [I-D.ietf-6lo-ap-nd], which guarantees the ownership of the | Networks" [I-D.ietf-6lo-ap-nd], which guarantees the ownership of the | |||
Registered Address using a cryptographic RUID. | Registered Address using a cryptographic RUID. | |||
The registration mechanism may be used by a rogue node to attack the | The registration mechanism may be used by a rogue node to attack the | |||
6LR or the 6LBR with a Denial-of-Service attack against the registry. | 6LR or the 6LBR with a Denial-of-Service attack against the registry. | |||
It may also happen that the registry of a 6LR or a 6LBR is saturated | It may also happen that the registry of a 6LR or a 6LBR is saturated | |||
and cannot take any more registration, which effectively denies the | and cannot take any more registrations, which effectively denies the | |||
requesting node the capability to use a new address. In order to | requesting node the capability to use a new address. In order to | |||
alleviate those concerns, Section 4.7 provides a number of | alleviate those concerns, Section 4.7 provides a number of | |||
recommendations that ensure that a stale registration is removed as | recommendations that ensure that a stale registration is removed as | |||
soon as possible from the 6LR and 6LBR. In particular, this | soon as possible from the 6LR and 6LBR. In particular, this | |||
specification recommends that: | specification recommends that: | |||
o A node that ceases to use an address SHOULD attempt to de-register | o A node that ceases to use an address SHOULD attempt to de-register | |||
that address from all the 6LRs to which it is registered. See | that address from all the 6LRs to which it is registered. See | |||
Section 4.2 for the mechanism to avoid replay attacks and avoiding | Section 4.2 for the mechanism to avoid replay attacks and avoiding | |||
the use of stale registration information. | the use of stale registration information. | |||
o The Registration lifetimes SHOULD be individually configurable for | o The Registration lifetimes SHOULD be individually configurable for | |||
each address or group of addresses. The nodes SHOULD be | each address or group of addresses. The nodes SHOULD be | |||
configured with a Registration Lifetime that reflects their | configured with a Registration Lifetime that reflects their | |||
expectation of how long they will use the address with the 6LR to | expectation of how long they will use the address with the 6LR to | |||
which it is registered. In particular, use cases that involve | which it is registered. In particular, use cases that involve | |||
mobility or rapid address changes SHOULD use lifetimes that are | mobility or rapid address changes SHOULD use lifetimes that are | |||
larger yet of a same order as the duration of the expectation of | larger yet of a same order as the duration of the expectation of | |||
presence. | presence. | |||
o The router (6LR or 6LBR) SHOULD be configurable so as to limit the | o The router (6LR or 6LBR) SHOULD be configurable so as to limit the | |||
number of addresses that can be registered by a single node, as | number of addresses that can be registered by a single node, but | |||
identified at least by MAC address and preferably by security | as a protective measure only. A node may be identified by MAC | |||
credentials. When that maximum is reached, the router should use | address, but a stringer identification (e.g., by security | |||
a Least-Recently-Used (LRU) algorithm to clean up the addresses, | credentials) is RECOMMENDED. When that maximum is reached, the | |||
keeping at least one Link-Local address. The router SHOULD | router should use a Least-Recently-Used (LRU) algorithm to clean | |||
attempt to keep one or more stable addresses if stability can be | up the addresses, keeping at least one Link-Local address. The | |||
determined, e.g. from the way the IID is formed or because they | router SHOULD attempt to keep one or more stable addresses if | |||
are used over a much longer time span than other (privacy, | stability can be determined, e.g., because they are used over a | |||
shorter-lived) addresses. Address lifetimes SHOULD be | much longer time span than other (privacy, shorter-lived) | |||
individually configurable. | addresses. Address lifetimes SHOULD be individually configurable. | |||
o In order to avoid denial of registration for the lack of | o In order to avoid denial of registration for the lack of | |||
resources, administrators should take great care to deploy | resources, administrators should take great care to deploy | |||
adequate numbers of 6LRs to cover the needs of the nodes in their | adequate numbers of 6LRs to cover the needs of the nodes in their | |||
range, so as to avoid a situation of starving nodes. It is | range, so as to avoid a situation of starving nodes. It is | |||
expected that the 6LBR that serves a LLN is a more capable node | expected that the 6LBR that serves a LLN is a more capable node | |||
then the average 6LR, but in a network condition where it may | then the average 6LR, but in a network condition where it may | |||
become saturated, a particular deployment should distribute the | become saturated, a particular deployment should distribute the | |||
6LBR functionality, for instance by leveraging a high speed | 6LBR functionality, for instance by leveraging a high speed | |||
Backbone Link and Backbone Routers to aggregate multiple LLNs into | Backbone Link and Backbone Routers to aggregate multiple LLNs into | |||
a larger subnet. | a larger subnet. | |||
skipping to change at page 22, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 42 ¶ | |||
trust model must be put in place to ensure that the right devices are | trust model must be put in place to ensure that the right devices are | |||
acting in these roles, so as to avoid threats such as black-holing, | acting in these roles, so as to avoid threats such as black-holing, | |||
or bombing attack whereby an impersonated 6LBR would destroy state in | or bombing attack whereby an impersonated 6LBR would destroy state in | |||
the network by using the "Removed" Status code. This trust model | the network by using the "Removed" Status code. This trust model | |||
could be at a minimum based on a Layer-2 access control, or could | could be at a minimum based on a Layer-2 access control, or could | |||
provide role validation as well (see Req5.1 in Appendix B.5). | provide role validation as well (see Req5.1 in Appendix B.5). | |||
9. Privacy Considerations | 9. Privacy Considerations | |||
As indicated in Section 3, this protocol does not aim at limiting the | As indicated in Section 3, this protocol does not aim at limiting the | |||
number of IPv6 addresses that a device can form. A host should be | number of IPv6 addresses that a device can form and if placed, a | |||
able to form and register any address that is topologically correct | limit should be a protective measure only, that is high enough not to | |||
in the subnet(s) advertised by the 6LR/6LBR. | interfere with the normal behavior of devices in the network. A host | |||
should be able to form and register any address that is topologically | ||||
correct in the subnet(s) advertised by the 6LR/6LBR. | ||||
This specification does not mandate any particular way for forming | This specification does not mandate any particular way for forming | |||
IPv6 addresses, but it discourages using EUI-64 for forming the | IPv6 addresses, but it discourages using EUI-64 for forming the | |||
Interface ID in the Link-Local address because this method prevents | Interface ID in the Link-Local address because this method prevents | |||
the usage of "SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND)" [RFC3971] and | the usage of "SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND)" [RFC3971] and | |||
"Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)" [RFC3972], and that of | "Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)" [RFC3972], and that of | |||
address privacy techniques. | address privacy techniques. | |||
"Privacy Considerations for IPv6 Adaptation-Layer Mechanisms" | "Privacy Considerations for IPv6 Adaptation-Layer Mechanisms" | |||
[RFC8065] explains why privacy is important and how to form privacy- | [RFC8065] explains why privacy is important and how to form privacy- | |||
aware addresses. All implementations and deployment must consider | aware addresses. All implementations and deployment must consider | |||
the option of privacy addresses in their own environment. | the option of privacy addresses in their own environment. | |||
The IPv6 address of the 6LN in the IPv6 header can be compressed | The IPv6 address of the 6LN in the IPv6 header can be compressed | |||
statelessly when the Interface Identifier in the IPv6 address can be | statelessly when the Interface Identifier in the IPv6 address can be | |||
derived from the Lower Layer address. When it is not critical to | derived from the Lower Layer address. When it is not critical to | |||
benefit from that compression, e.g. the address can be compressed | benefit from that compression, e.g. the address can be compressed | |||
statefully, or it is rarely used and/or it is used only over one hop, | statefully, or it is rarely used and/or it is used only over one hop, | |||
then privacy concerns should be considered. In particular, new | then privacy concerns should be considered. In particular, new | |||
implementations should follow the IETF "Recommendation on Stable IPv6 | implementations should follow the IETF "Recommendation on Stable IPv6 | |||
Interface Identifiers" [RFC8064] This RFC recommends the use of "A | Interface Identifiers" [RFC8064] [RFC8064] recommends the use of "A | |||
Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers with | Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers with | |||
IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)" [RFC7217] for | IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)" [RFC7217] for | |||
generating Interface Identifiers to be used in SLAAC. | generating Interface Identifiers to be used in SLAAC. | |||
10. IANA Considerations | 10. IANA Considerations | |||
Note to RFC Editor: please replace "This RFC" throughout this | Note to RFC Editor: please replace "This RFC" throughout this | |||
document by the RFC number for this specification once it is | document by the RFC number for this specification once it is | |||
attributed. | attributed. | |||
skipping to change at page 27, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 28, line 8 ¶ | |||
6man-efficient-nd-07 (work in progress), February 2015. | 6man-efficient-nd-07 (work in progress), February 2015. | |||
[I-D.delcarpio-6lo-wlanah] | [I-D.delcarpio-6lo-wlanah] | |||
Vega, L., Robles, I., and R. Morabito, "IPv6 over | Vega, L., Robles, I., and R. Morabito, "IPv6 over | |||
802.11ah", draft-delcarpio-6lo-wlanah-01 (work in | 802.11ah", draft-delcarpio-6lo-wlanah-01 (work in | |||
progress), October 2015. | progress), October 2015. | |||
[I-D.ietf-6lo-ap-nd] | [I-D.ietf-6lo-ap-nd] | |||
Thubert, P., Sarikaya, B., and M. Sethi, "Address | Thubert, P., Sarikaya, B., and M. Sethi, "Address | |||
Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-power and Lossy | Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-power and Lossy | |||
Networks", draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd-05 (work in progress), | Networks", draft-ietf-6lo-ap-nd-06 (work in progress), | |||
January 2018. | February 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router] | [I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router] | |||
Thubert, P., "IPv6 Backbone Router", draft-ietf-6lo- | Thubert, P., "IPv6 Backbone Router", draft-ietf-6lo- | |||
backbone-router-05 (work in progress), January 2018. | backbone-router-06 (work in progress), February 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc] | [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc] | |||
Choi, Y., Hong, Y., Youn, J., Kim, D., and J. Choi, | Choi, Y., Hong, Y., Youn, J., Kim, D., and J. Choi, | |||
"Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Near Field | "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Near Field | |||
Communication", draft-ietf-6lo-nfc-09 (work in progress), | Communication", draft-ietf-6lo-nfc-09 (work in progress), | |||
January 2018. | January 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] | |||
Thubert, P., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the TSCH mode | Thubert, P., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the TSCH mode | |||
of IEEE 802.15.4", draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-13 (work | of IEEE 802.15.4", draft-ietf-6tisch-architecture-13 (work | |||
skipping to change at page 27, line 37 ¶ | skipping to change at page 28, line 37 ¶ | |||
Thaler, D. and C. Huitema, "Multi-link Subnet Support in | Thaler, D. and C. Huitema, "Multi-link Subnet Support in | |||
IPv6", draft-ietf-ipv6-multilink-subnets-00 (work in | IPv6", draft-ietf-ipv6-multilink-subnets-00 (work in | |||
progress), July 2002. | progress), July 2002. | |||
[I-D.ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems] | [I-D.ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems] | |||
Perkins, C., McBride, M., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and J. | Perkins, C., McBride, M., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and J. | |||
Zuniga, "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless | Zuniga, "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless | |||
Media", draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-01 (work | Media", draft-ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems-01 (work | |||
in progress), February 2018. | in progress), February 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-roll-efficient-npdao] | ||||
Jadhav, R., Sahoo, R., and Z. Cao, "No-Path DAO | ||||
modifications", draft-ietf-roll-efficient-npdao-01 (work | ||||
in progress), October 2017. | ||||
[I-D.perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802] | [I-D.perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802] | |||
Perkins, C., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and J. Zuniga, | Perkins, C., Stanley, D., Kumari, W., and J. Zuniga, | |||
"Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless Media", | "Multicast Considerations over IEEE 802 Wireless Media", | |||
draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802-03 (work in | draft-perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802-03 (work in | |||
progress), July 2017. | progress), July 2017. | |||
[I-D.popa-6lo-6loplc-ipv6-over-ieee19012-networks] | [I-D.popa-6lo-6loplc-ipv6-over-ieee19012-networks] | |||
Popa, D. and J. Hui, "6LoPLC: Transmission of IPv6 Packets | Popa, D. and J. Hui, "6LoPLC: Transmission of IPv6 Packets | |||
over IEEE 1901.2 Narrowband Powerline Communication | over IEEE 1901.2 Narrowband Powerline Communication | |||
Networks", draft-popa-6lo-6loplc-ipv6-over- | Networks", draft-popa-6lo-6loplc-ipv6-over- | |||
ieee19012-networks-00 (work in progress), March 2014. | ieee19012-networks-00 (work in progress), March 2014. | |||
[I-D.struik-lwip-curve-representations] | [I-D.struik-lwip-curve-representations] | |||
Struik, R., "Alternative Elliptic Curve Representations", | Struik, R., "Alternative Elliptic Curve Representations", | |||
draft-struik-lwip-curve-representations-00 (work in | draft-struik-lwip-curve-representations-00 (work in | |||
progress), October 2017. | progress), October 2017. | |||
[RFC1558] Howes, T., "A String Representation of LDAP Search | [RFC1958] Carpenter, B., Ed., "Architectural Principles of the | |||
Filters", RFC 1558, DOI 10.17487/RFC1558, December 1993, | Internet", RFC 1958, DOI 10.17487/RFC1958, June 1996, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1558>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1958>. | |||
[RFC1982] Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Serial Number Arithmetic", RFC 1982, | [RFC1982] Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Serial Number Arithmetic", RFC 1982, | |||
DOI 10.17487/RFC1982, August 1996, | DOI 10.17487/RFC1982, August 1996, | |||
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1982>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1982>. | |||
[RFC3610] Whiting, D., Housley, R., and N. Ferguson, "Counter with | [RFC3610] Whiting, D., Housley, R., and N. Ferguson, "Counter with | |||
CBC-MAC (CCM)", RFC 3610, DOI 10.17487/RFC3610, September | CBC-MAC (CCM)", RFC 3610, DOI 10.17487/RFC3610, September | |||
2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3610>. | 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3610>. | |||
[RFC3810] Vida, R., Ed. and L. Costa, Ed., "Multicast Listener | [RFC3810] Vida, R., Ed. and L. Costa, Ed., "Multicast Listener | |||
skipping to change at page 30, line 39 ¶ | skipping to change at page 31, line 43 ¶ | |||
[Perlman83] | [Perlman83] | |||
Perlman, R., "Fault-Tolerant Broadcast of Routing | Perlman, R., "Fault-Tolerant Broadcast of Routing | |||
Information", North-Holland Computer Networks 7: 395-405, | Information", North-Holland Computer Networks 7: 395-405, | |||
1983, <http://www.cs.illinois.edu/~pbg/courses/cs598fa09/ | 1983, <http://www.cs.illinois.edu/~pbg/courses/cs598fa09/ | |||
readings/p83.pdf>. | readings/p83.pdf>. | |||
Appendix A. Applicability and Requirements Served | Appendix A. Applicability and Requirements Served | |||
This specification extends 6LoWPAN ND to provide a sequence number to | This specification extends 6LoWPAN ND to provide a sequence number to | |||
the registration and serves the requirements expressed Appendix B.1 | the registration and serves the requirements expressed in | |||
by enabling the mobility of devices from one LLN to the next based on | Appendix B.1 by enabling the mobility of devices from one LLN to the | |||
the complementary work in the "IPv6 Backbone Router" | next based on the complementary work in the "IPv6 Backbone Router" | |||
[I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router] specification. | [I-D.ietf-6lo-backbone-router] specification. | |||
In the context of the the TimeSlotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) mode of | In the context of the TimeSlotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) mode of IEEE | |||
IEEE Std. 802.15.4 [IEEEstd802154], the "6TiSCH architecture" | Std. 802.15.4 [IEEEstd802154], the "6TiSCH architecture" | |||
[I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] introduces how a 6LoWPAN ND host could | [I-D.ietf-6tisch-architecture] introduces how a 6LoWPAN ND host could | |||
connect to the Internet via a RPL mesh Network, but this requires | connect to the Internet via a RPL mesh Network, but this requires | |||
additions to the 6LoWPAN ND protocol to support mobility and | additions to the 6LoWPAN ND protocol to support mobility and | |||
reachability in a secured and manageable environment. This | reachability in a secured and manageable environment. This | |||
specification details the new operations that are required to | specification details the new operations that are required to | |||
implement the 6TiSCH architecture and serves the requirements listed | implement the 6TiSCH architecture and serves the requirements listed | |||
in Appendix B.2. | in Appendix B.2. | |||
The term LLN is used loosely in this specification to cover multiple | The term LLN is used loosely in this specification to cover multiple | |||
types of WLANs and WPANs, including Low-Power Wi-Fi, BLUETOOTH(R) Low | types of WLANs and WPANs, including Low-Power Wi-Fi, BLUETOOTH(R) Low | |||
skipping to change at page 31, line 36 ¶ | skipping to change at page 32, line 40 ¶ | |||
packets is not sufficiently efficient in terms of delivery ratio or | packets is not sufficiently efficient in terms of delivery ratio or | |||
energy consumption in the end devices, in particular to enable | energy consumption in the end devices, in particular to enable | |||
energy-constrained sleeping nodes. The value of such extension is | energy-constrained sleeping nodes. The value of such extension is | |||
especially apparent in the case of mobile wireless nodes, to reduce | especially apparent in the case of mobile wireless nodes, to reduce | |||
the multicast operations that are related to IPv6 ND ([RFC4861], | the multicast operations that are related to IPv6 ND ([RFC4861], | |||
[RFC4862]) and affect the operation of the wireless medium | [RFC4862]) and affect the operation of the wireless medium | |||
[I-D.ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems] | [I-D.ietf-mboned-ieee802-mcast-problems] | |||
[I-D.perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802]. This serves the scalability | [I-D.perkins-intarea-multicast-ieee802]. This serves the scalability | |||
requirements listed in Appendix B.6. | requirements listed in Appendix B.6. | |||
Finally Appendix B.8 provides a matching of requirements with the | ||||
specifications that serves them. | ||||
Appendix B. Requirements | Appendix B. Requirements | |||
This section lists requirements that were discussed at 6lo for an | This section lists requirements that were discussed at 6lo for an | |||
update to 6LoWPAN ND. This specification meets most of them, but | update to 6LoWPAN ND. How those requirements are matched with | |||
those listed in Appendix B.5 which are deferred to a different | existing specifications at the time of this writing is shown in | |||
specification such as [I-D.ietf-6lo-ap-nd], and those related to | Appendix B.8 . | |||
multicast. | ||||
B.1. Requirements Related to Mobility | B.1. Requirements Related to Mobility | |||
Due to the unstable nature of LLN links, even in a LLN of immobile | Due to the unstable nature of LLN links, even in a LLN of immobile | |||
nodes a 6LN may change its point of attachment to a 6LR, say 6LR-a, | nodes a 6LN may change its point of attachment to a 6LR, say 6LR-a, | |||
and may not be able to notify 6LR-a. Consequently, 6LR-a may still | and may not be able to notify 6LR-a. Consequently, 6LR-a may still | |||
attract traffic that it cannot deliver any more. When links to a 6LR | attract traffic that it cannot deliver any more. When links to a 6LR | |||
change state, there is thus a need to identify stale states in a 6LR | change state, there is thus a need to identify stale states in a 6LR | |||
and restore reachability in a timely fashion. | and restore reachability in a timely fashion. | |||
Req1.1: Upon a change of point of attachment, connectivity via a new | Req1.1: Upon a change of point of attachment, connectivity via a new | |||
6LR MUST be restored in a timely fashion without the need to de- | 6LR MUST be restored in a timely fashion without the need to de- | |||
register from the previous 6LR. | register from the previous 6LR. | |||
Req1.2: For that purpose, the protocol MUST enable to differentiate | Req1.2: For that purpose, the protocol MUST enable differentiating | |||
between multiple registrations from one 6LoWPAN Node and | between multiple registrations from one 6LoWPAN Node and | |||
registrations from different 6LoWPAN Nodes claiming the same address. | registrations from different 6LoWPAN Nodes claiming the same address. | |||
Req1.3: Stale states MUST be cleaned up in 6LRs. | Req1.3: Stale states MUST be cleaned up in 6LRs. | |||
Req1.4: A 6LoWPAN Node SHOULD also be capable to register its Address | Req1.4: A 6LoWPAN Node SHOULD also be able to register its Address | |||
concurrently to multiple 6LRs. | concurrently to multiple 6LRs. | |||
B.2. Requirements Related to Routing Protocols | B.2. Requirements Related to Routing Protocols | |||
The point of attachment of a 6LN may be a 6LR in an LLN mesh. IPv6 | The point of attachment of a 6LN may be a 6LR in an LLN mesh. IPv6 | |||
routing in a LLN can be based on RPL, which is the routing protocol | routing in a LLN can be based on RPL, which is the routing protocol | |||
that was defined at the IETF for this particular purpose. Other | that was defined at the IETF for this particular purpose. Other | |||
routing protocols than RPL are also considered by Standard Defining | routing protocols are also considered by Standard Development | |||
Organizations (SDO) on the basis of the expected network | Organizations (SDO) on the basis of the expected network | |||
characteristics. It is required that a 6LoWPAN Node attached via ND | characteristics. It is required that a 6LoWPAN Node attached via ND | |||
to a 6LR would need to participate in the selected routing protocol | to a 6LR would need to participate in the selected routing protocol | |||
to obtain reachability via the 6LR. | to obtain reachability via the 6LR. | |||
Next to the 6LBR unicast address registered by ND, other addresses | Next to the 6LBR unicast address registered by ND, other addresses | |||
including multicast addresses are needed as well. For example a | including multicast addresses are needed as well. For example a | |||
routing protocol often uses a multicast address to register changes | routing protocol often uses a multicast address to register changes | |||
to established paths. ND needs to register such a multicast address | to established paths. ND needs to register such a multicast address | |||
to enable routing concurrently with discovery. | to enable routing concurrently with discovery. | |||
Multicast is needed for groups. Groups may be formed by device type | Multicast is needed for groups. Groups may be formed by device type | |||
(e.g. routers, street lamps), location (Geography, RPL sub-tree), or | (e.g., routers, street lamps), location (Geography, RPL sub-tree), or | |||
both. | both. | |||
The Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Architecture [RFC8279] | The Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Architecture [RFC8279] | |||
proposes an optimized technique to enable multicast in a LLN with a | proposes an optimized technique to enable multicast in a LLN with a | |||
very limited requirement for routing state in the nodes. | very limited requirement for routing state in the nodes. | |||
Related requirements are: | Related requirements are: | |||
Req2.1: The ND registration method SHOULD be extended so that the 6LR | Req2.1: The ND registration method SHOULD be extended so that the 6LR | |||
is able to advertise the Address of a 6LoWPAN Node over the selected | is able to advertise the Address of a 6LoWPAN Node over the selected | |||
skipping to change at page 33, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 34, line 21 ¶ | |||
Req2.3: Multicast operations SHOULD be supported and optimized, for | Req2.3: Multicast operations SHOULD be supported and optimized, for | |||
instance using BIER or MPL. Whether ND is appropriate for the | instance using BIER or MPL. Whether ND is appropriate for the | |||
registration to the 6BBR is to be defined, considering the additional | registration to the 6BBR is to be defined, considering the additional | |||
burden of supporting the Multicast Listener Discovery Version 2 | burden of supporting the Multicast Listener Discovery Version 2 | |||
[RFC3810] (MLDv2) for IPv6. | [RFC3810] (MLDv2) for IPv6. | |||
B.3. Requirements Related to the Variety of Low-Power Link types | B.3. Requirements Related to the Variety of Low-Power Link types | |||
6LoWPAN ND [RFC6775] was defined with a focus on IEEE Std.802.15.4 | 6LoWPAN ND [RFC6775] was defined with a focus on IEEE Std.802.15.4 | |||
and in particular the capability to derive a unique Identifier from a | and in particular the capability to derive a unique Identifier from a | |||
globally unique MAC-64 address. At this point, the 6lo Working Group | globally unique EUI-64 address. At this point, the 6lo Working Group | |||
is extending the 6LoWPAN Header Compression (HC) [RFC6282] technique | is extending the 6LoWPAN Header Compression (HC) [RFC6282] technique | |||
to other link types ITU-T G.9959 [RFC7428], Master-Slave/Token- | to other link types ITU-T G.9959 [RFC7428], Master-Slave/Token- | |||
Passing [RFC8163], DECT Ultra Low Energy [RFC8105], Near Field | Passing [RFC8163], DECT Ultra Low Energy [RFC8105], Near Field | |||
Communication [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc], IEEE Std. 802.11ah | Communication [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc], IEEE Std. 802.11ah | |||
[I-D.delcarpio-6lo-wlanah], as well as IEEE1901.2 Narrowband | [I-D.delcarpio-6lo-wlanah], as well as IEEE1901.2 Narrowband | |||
Powerline Communication Networks | Powerline Communication Networks | |||
[I-D.popa-6lo-6loplc-ipv6-over-ieee19012-networks] and BLUETOOTH(R) | [I-D.popa-6lo-6loplc-ipv6-over-ieee19012-networks] and BLUETOOTH(R) | |||
Low Energy [RFC7668]. | Low Energy [RFC7668]. | |||
Related requirements are: | Related requirements are: | |||
skipping to change at page 33, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 34, line 46 ¶ | |||
Low-Power Wi-Fi. | Low-Power Wi-Fi. | |||
Req3.2: As part of this extension, a mechanism to compute a unique | Req3.2: As part of this extension, a mechanism to compute a unique | |||
Identifier should be provided, with the capability to form a Link- | Identifier should be provided, with the capability to form a Link- | |||
Local Address that SHOULD be unique at least within the LLN connected | Local Address that SHOULD be unique at least within the LLN connected | |||
to a 6LBR discovered by ND in each node within the LLN. | to a 6LBR discovered by ND in each node within the LLN. | |||
Req3.3: The Address Registration Option used in the ND registration | Req3.3: The Address Registration Option used in the ND registration | |||
SHOULD be extended to carry the relevant forms of unique Identifier. | SHOULD be extended to carry the relevant forms of unique Identifier. | |||
Req3.4: The Neighbour Discovery should specify the formation of a | Req3.4: The Neighbor Discovery should specify the formation of a | |||
site-local address that follows the security recommendations from | site-local address that follows the security recommendations from | |||
[RFC7217]. | [RFC7217]. | |||
B.4. Requirements Related to Proxy Operations | B.4. Requirements Related to Proxy Operations | |||
Duty-cycled devices may not be able to answer themselves to a lookup | Duty-cycled devices may not be able to answer themselves to a lookup | |||
from a node that uses IPv6 ND on a Backbone Link and may need a | from a node that uses IPv6 ND on a Backbone Link and may need a | |||
proxy. Additionally, the duty-cycled device may need to rely on the | proxy. Additionally, the duty-cycled device may need to rely on the | |||
6LBR to perform registration to the 6BBR. | 6LBR to perform registration to the 6BBR. | |||
skipping to change at page 34, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 35, line 41 ¶ | |||
In order to guarantee the operations of the 6LoWPAN ND flows, the | In order to guarantee the operations of the 6LoWPAN ND flows, the | |||
spoofing of the 6LR, 6LBR and 6BBRs roles should be avoided. Once a | spoofing of the 6LR, 6LBR and 6BBRs roles should be avoided. Once a | |||
node successfully registers an address, 6LoWPAN ND should provide | node successfully registers an address, 6LoWPAN ND should provide | |||
energy-efficient means for the 6LBR to protect that ownership even | energy-efficient means for the 6LBR to protect that ownership even | |||
when the node that registered the address is sleeping. | when the node that registered the address is sleeping. | |||
In particular, the 6LR and the 6LBR then should be able to verify | In particular, the 6LR and the 6LBR then should be able to verify | |||
whether a subsequent registration for a given address comes from the | whether a subsequent registration for a given address comes from the | |||
original node. | original node. | |||
In a LLN it makes sense to base security on layer-2 security. During | In an LLN it makes sense to base security on layer-2 security. | |||
bootstrap of the LLN, nodes join the network after authorization by a | During bootstrap of the LLN, nodes join the network after | |||
Joining Assistant (JA) or a Commissioning Tool (CT). After joining | authorization by a Joining Assistant (JA) or a Commissioning Tool | |||
nodes communicate with each other via secured links. The keys for | (CT). After joining nodes communicate with each other via secured | |||
the layer-2 security are distributed by the JA/CT. The JA/CT can be | links. The keys for the layer-2 security are distributed by the JA/ | |||
part of the LLN or be outside the LLN. In both cases it is needed | CT. The JA/CT can be part of the LLN or be outside the LLN. In both | |||
that packets are routed between JA/CT and the joining node. | cases it is needed that packets are routed between JA/CT and the | |||
joining node. | ||||
Related requirements are: | Related requirements are: | |||
Req5.1: 6LoWPAN ND security mechanisms SHOULD provide a mechanism for | Req5.1: 6LoWPAN ND security mechanisms SHOULD provide a mechanism for | |||
the 6LR, 6LBR and 6BBR to authenticate and authorize one another for | the 6LR, 6LBR and 6BBR to authenticate and authorize one another for | |||
their respective roles, as well as with the 6LoWPAN Node for the role | their respective roles, as well as with the 6LoWPAN Node for the role | |||
of 6LR. | of 6LR. | |||
Req5.2: 6LoWPAN ND security mechanisms SHOULD provide a mechanism for | Req5.2: 6LoWPAN ND security mechanisms SHOULD provide a mechanism for | |||
the 6LR and the 6LBR to validate new registration of authorized | the 6LR and the 6LBR to validate new registration of authorized | |||
skipping to change at page 35, line 41 ¶ | skipping to change at page 36, line 44 ¶ | |||
for multiple types of applications with various degrees of | for multiple types of applications with various degrees of | |||
criticality. | criticality. | |||
Req5.8: Routing of packets should continue when links pass from the | Req5.8: Routing of packets should continue when links pass from the | |||
unsecured to the secured state. | unsecured to the secured state. | |||
Req5.9: 6LoWPAN ND security mechanisms SHOULD provide a mechanism for | Req5.9: 6LoWPAN ND security mechanisms SHOULD provide a mechanism for | |||
the 6LR and the 6LBR to validate whether a new registration for a | the 6LR and the 6LBR to validate whether a new registration for a | |||
given address corresponds to the same 6LoWPAN Node that registered it | given address corresponds to the same 6LoWPAN Node that registered it | |||
initially, and, if not, determine the rightful owner, and deny or | initially, and, if not, determine the rightful owner, and deny or | |||
clean-up the registration that is duplicate. | clean up the registration that is duplicate. | |||
B.6. Requirements Related to Scalability | B.6. Requirements Related to Scalability | |||
Use cases from Automatic Meter Reading (AMR, collection tree | Use cases from Automatic Meter Reading (AMR, collection tree | |||
operations) and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI, bi-directional | operations) and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI, bi-directional | |||
communication to the meters) indicate the needs for a large number of | communication to the meters) indicate the needs for a large number of | |||
LLN nodes pertaining to a single RPL DODAG (e.g. 5000) and connected | LLN nodes pertaining to a single RPL DODAG (e.g., 5000) and connected | |||
to the 6LBR over a large number of LLN hops (e.g. 15). | to the 6LBR over a large number of LLN hops (e.g., 15). | |||
Related requirements are: | Related requirements are: | |||
Req6.1: The registration mechanism SHOULD enable a single 6LBR to | Req6.1: The registration mechanism SHOULD enable a single 6LBR to | |||
register multiple thousands of devices. | register multiple thousands of devices. | |||
Req6.2: The timing of the registration operation should allow for a | Req6.2: The timing of the registration operation should allow for a | |||
large latency such as found in LLNs with ten and more hops. | large latency such as found in LLNs with ten and more hops. | |||
B.7. Requirements Related to Operations and Management | B.7. Requirements Related to Operations and Management | |||
Section 3.8 of "Architectural Principles of the Internet" [RFC1558] | Section 3.8 of "Architectural Principles of the Internet" [RFC1958] | |||
recommends to : "avoid options and parameters whenever possible. Any | recommends to : "avoid options and parameters whenever possible. Any | |||
options and parameters should be configured or negotiated dynamically | options and parameters should be configured or negotiated dynamically | |||
rather than manually". This is especially true in LLNs where the | rather than manually". This is especially true in LLNs where the | |||
number of devices may be large and manual configuration is | number of devices may be large and manual configuration is | |||
infeasible. Capabilities for a dynamic configuration of LLN devices | infeasible. Capabilities for a dynamic configuration of LLN devices | |||
can also be constrained by the network and power limitation. | can also be constrained by the network and power limitation. | |||
A Network Administrator should be able to validate that the network | A Network Administrator should be able to validate that the network | |||
is operating within capacity, and that in particular a 6LBR does not | is operating within capacity, and that in particular a 6LBR does not | |||
get overloaded with an excessive amount of registration, so he can | get overloaded with an excessive amount of registration, so he can | |||
skipping to change at page 38, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at page 39, line 26 ¶ | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
| Req7.3 | | | | Req7.3 | | | |||
| | | | | | | | |||
| Req7.4 | | | | Req7.4 | | | |||
+-------------+-----------------------------------------+ | +-------------+-----------------------------------------+ | |||
Table 7: Work Addressing requirements | Table 7: Work Addressing requirements | |||
Appendix C. Subset of a 6LoWPAN Glossary | Appendix C. Subset of a 6LoWPAN Glossary | |||
This document often uses the followng acronyms: | This document often uses the following acronyms: | |||
6BBR: 6LoWPAN Backbone Router (proxy for the registration) | 6BBR: 6LoWPAN Backbone Router (proxy for the registration) | |||
6LBR: 6LoWPAN Border Router (authoritative on DAD) | 6LBR: 6LoWPAN Border Router (authoritative on DAD) | |||
6LN: 6LoWPAN Node | 6LN: 6LoWPAN Node | |||
6LR: 6LoWPAN Router (relay to the registration process) | 6LR: 6LoWPAN Router (relay to the registration process) | |||
6CIO: Capability Indication Option | 6CIO: Capability Indication Option | |||
(E)ARO: (Extended) Address Registration Option | (E)ARO: (Extended) Address Registration Option | |||
DAD: Duplicate Address Detection | DAD: Duplicate Address Detection | |||
LLN: Low Power Lossy Network (a typical IoT network) | LLN: Low Power Lossy Network (a typical IoT network) | |||
NA: Neighbor Advertisement | ||||
NCE: Neighbor Cache Entry | NCE: Neighbor Cache Entry | |||
ND: Neighbor Discovery | ||||
NDP: Neighbor Discovery Protocol | ||||
NS: Neighbor Solicitation | ||||
RUID: Registration Unique ID | RUID: Registration Unique ID | |||
TSCH: TimeSlotted Channel Hopping | TSCH: TimeSlotted Channel Hopping | |||
TID: Transaction ID (a sequence counter in the EARO) | TID: Transaction ID (a sequence counter in the EARO) | |||
Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
Pascal Thubert (editor) | Pascal Thubert (editor) | |||
Cisco Systems, Inc | Cisco Systems, Inc | |||
Building D (Regus) 45 Allee des Ormes | Building D (Regus) 45 Allee des Ormes | |||
Mougins - Sophia Antipolis | Mougins - Sophia Antipolis | |||
France | France | |||
Phone: +33 4 97 23 26 34 | Phone: +33 4 97 23 26 34 | |||
Email: pthubert@cisco.com | Email: pthubert@cisco.com | |||
Erik Nordmark | Erik Nordmark | |||
Zededa | Zededa | |||
Santa Clara, CA | Santa Clara, CA | |||
United States of America | United States of America | |||
Email: nordmark@sonic.net | Email: nordmark@sonic.net | |||
Samita Chakrabarti | Samita Chakrabarti | |||
Verizon | Verizon | |||
San Jose, CA | San Jose, CA | |||
End of changes. 98 change blocks. | ||||
217 lines changed or deleted | 251 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |