draft-ietf-core-new-block-14.txt   rfc9177.txt 
CoRE Working Group M. Boucadair Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Boucadair
Internet-Draft Orange Request for Comments: 9177 Orange
Intended status: Standards Track J. Shallow Category: Standards Track J. Shallow
Expires: November 27, 2021 May 26, 2021 ISSN: 2070-1721 March 2022
Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) Block-Wise Transfer Options Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) Block-Wise Transfer Options
Supporting Robust Transmission Supporting Robust Transmission
draft-ietf-core-new-block-14
Abstract Abstract
This document specifies alternative Constrained Application Protocol This document specifies alternative Constrained Application Protocol
(CoAP) Block-Wise transfer options: Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options. (CoAP) block-wise transfer options: Q-Block1 and Q-Block2.
These options are similar to, but distinct from, the CoAP Block1 and These options are similar to, but distinct from, the CoAP Block1 and
Block2 Options defined in RFC 7959. Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Block2 options defined in RFC 7959. The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2
are not intended to replace Block1 and Block2 Options, but rather options are not intended to replace the Block1 and Block2 options but
have the goal of supporting Non-confirmable messages for large rather have the goal of supporting Non-confirmable (NON) messages for
amounts of data with fewer packet interchanges. Also, the Q-Block1 large amounts of data with fewer packet interchanges. Also, the
and Q-Block2 Options support faster recovery should any of the blocks Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options support faster recovery should any of
get lost in transmission. the blocks get lost in transmission.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 27, 2021. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9177.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2022 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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
described in the Simplified BSD License. in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology
3. Alternative CoAP Block-Wise Transfer Options . . . . . . . . 5 3. Alternative CoAP Block-Wise Transfer Options
3.1. CoAP Response Code (4.08) Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1. CoAP Response Code (4.08) Usage
3.2. Applicability Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Applicability Scope
4. The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
4.1. Properties of Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options . . . . . . . 8 4.1. Properties of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
4.2. Structure of Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options . . . . . . . 10 4.2. Structure of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
4.3. Using the Q-Block1 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.3. Using the Q-Block1 Option
4.4. Using the Q-Block2 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.4. Using the Q-Block2 Option
4.5. Using Observe Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.5. Using the Observe Option
4.6. Using Size1 and Size2 Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.6. Using the Size1 and Size2 Options
4.7. Using Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Together . . . . . . 18 4.7. Using the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Together
4.8. Using Q-Block2 Option With Multicast . . . . . . . . . . 18 4.8. Using the Q-Block2 Option with Multicast
5. The Use of 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) Response Code . . 18 5. The Use of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) Response Code
6. The Use of Tokens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6. The Use of Tokens
7. Congestion Control for Unreliable Transports . . . . . . . . 20 7. Congestion Control for Unreliable Transports
7.1. Confirmable (CON) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7.1. Confirmable (CON)
7.2. Non-confirmable (NON) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7.2. Non-confirmable (NON)
8. Caching Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 8. Caching Considerations
9. HTTP-Mapping Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 9. HTTP Mapping Considerations
10. Examples with Non-confirmable Messages . . . . . . . . . . . 26 10. Examples with Non-confirmable Messages
10.1. Q-Block1 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 10.1. Q-Block1 Option
10.1.1. A Simple Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 10.1.1. A Simple Example
10.1.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 10.1.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits
10.1.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery . . . . . . . . 27 10.1.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery
10.1.4. Handling Recovery with Failure . . . . . . . . . . . 29 10.1.4. Handling Recovery if Failure Occurs
10.2. Q-Block2 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 10.2. Q-Block2 Option
10.2.1. A Simple Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 10.2.1. A Simple Example
10.2.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 10.2.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits
10.2.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery . . . . . . . . 32 10.2.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery
10.2.4. Handling Recovery using M-bit Set . . . . . . . . . 33 10.2.4. Handling Recovery by Setting the M Bit
10.3. Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 10.3. Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
10.3.1. A Simple Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 10.3.1. A Simple Example
10.3.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 10.3.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits
10.3.3. Handling Recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 10.3.3. Handling Recovery
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 11. Security Considerations
12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 12. IANA Considerations
12.1. CoAP Option Numbers Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 12.1. CoAP Option Numbers Registry
12.2. Media Type Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 12.2. Media Type Registration
12.3. CoAP Content-Formats Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 12.3. CoAP Content-Formats Registry
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 13. References
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 13.1. Normative References
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 13.2. Informative References
Appendix A. Examples with Confirmable Messages . . . . . . . . . 43 Appendix A. Examples with Confirmable Messages
A.1. Q-Block1 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 A.1. Q-Block1 Option
A.2. Q-Block2 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 A.2. Q-Block2 Option
Appendix B. Examples with Reliable Transports . . . . . . . . . 47 Appendix B. Examples with Reliable Transports
B.1. Q-Block1 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 B.1. Q-Block1 Option
B.2. Q-Block2 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 B.2. Q-Block2 Option
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Acknowledgments
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Authors' Addresses
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) [RFC7252], although The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) [RFC7252], although
inspired by HTTP, was designed to use UDP instead of TCP. The inspired by HTTP, was designed to use UDP instead of TCP. The
message layer of CoAP over UDP includes support for reliable message layer of CoAP over UDP includes support for reliable
delivery, simple congestion control, and flow control. CoAP supports delivery, simple congestion control, and flow control. CoAP supports
two message types (Section 1.2 of [RFC7252]): Confirmable (CON) and two message types (Section 1.2 of [RFC7252]): Confirmable (CON) and
Non-confirmable (NON) messages. Unlike NON messages, every CON Non-confirmable (NON). Unlike NON messages, every CON message will
message will elicit an acknowledgement or a reset. elicit an acknowledgment or a reset.
The CoAP specification recommends that a CoAP message should fit The CoAP specification recommends that a CoAP message should fit
within a single IP packet (i.e., avoid IP fragmentation). To handle within a single IP packet (i.e., avoid IP fragmentation). To handle
data records that cannot fit in a single IP packet, [RFC7959] data records that cannot fit in a single IP packet, [RFC7959]
introduced the concept of block-wise transfer and the companion CoAP introduced the concept of block-wise transfers and the companion CoAP
Block1 and Block2 Options. However, this concept is designed to work Block1 and Block2 options. However, this concept is designed to work
exclusively with Confirmable messages (Section 1 of [RFC7959]). Note exclusively with Confirmable messages (Section 1 of [RFC7959]). Note
that the block-wise transfer was further updated by [RFC8323] for use that the block-wise transfer was further updated by [RFC8323] for use
over TCP, TLS, and WebSockets. over TCP, TLS, and WebSockets.
The CoAP Block1 and Block2 Options work well in environments where The CoAP Block1 and Block2 options work well in environments where
there are no, or minimal, packet losses. These options operate there are no, or minimal, packet losses. These options operate
synchronously, i.e., each individual block has to be requested. A synchronously, i.e., each individual block has to be requested. A
CoAP endpoint can only ask for (or send) the next block when the CoAP endpoint can only ask for (or send) the next block when the
transfer of the previous block has completed. Packet transmission transfer of the previous block has completed. The packet
rate, and hence block transmission rate, is controlled by Round Trip transmission rate, and hence the block transmission rate, is
Times (RTTs). controlled by Round-Trip Times (RTTs).
There is a requirement for blocks of data larger than a single IP There is a requirement for blocks of data larger than a single IP
datagram to be transmitted under network conditions where there may datagram to be transmitted under network conditions where there may
be asymmetrical transient packet loss (e.g., acknowledgment responses be asymmetrical transient packet loss (e.g., acknowledgment responses
may get dropped). An example is when a network is subject to a may get dropped). An example is when a network is subject to a
Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack and there is a need for Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack and there is a need for
DDoS mitigation agents relying upon CoAP to communicate with each DDoS mitigation agents relying upon CoAP to communicate with each
other (e.g., [RFC8782][I-D.ietf-dots-telemetry]). As a reminder, other (e.g., [RFC9132] [DOTS-TELEMETRY]). As a reminder, [RFC7959]
recommends the use of CON responses to handle potential packet loss.
[RFC7959] recommends the use of CON responses to handle potential However, such a recommendation does not work with a "flooded pipe"
packet loss. However, such a recommendation does not work with a DDoS situation (e.g., [RFC9132]).
flooded pipe DDoS situation (e.g., [RFC8782]).
This document introduces the CoAP Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options which This document introduces the CoAP Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options,
allow block-wise transfer to work with series of Non-confirmable which allow block-wise transfers to work with a series of Non-
messages, instead of lock-stepping using Confirmable messages confirmable messages instead of lock-stepping using Confirmable
(Section 3). In other words, this document provides a missing piece messages (Section 3). In other words, this document provides a
of [RFC7959], namely the support of block-wise transfer using Non- missing piece of [RFC7959], namely the support of block-wise
confirmable where an entire body of data can be transmitted without transfers using Non-confirmable messages where an entire body of data
the requirement that intermediate acknowledgments be received from can be transmitted without the requirement that intermediate
the peer (but recovery is available should it be needed). acknowledgments be received from the peer (but recovery is available
should it be needed).
Similar to [RFC7959], this specification does not remove any of the Similar to [RFC7959], this specification does not remove any of the
constraints posed by the base CoAP specification [RFC7252] it is constraints posed by the base CoAP specification [RFC7252] it is
strictly layered on top of. strictly layered on top of.
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", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
14 [RFC2119][RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
Readers should be familiar with the terms and concepts defined in Readers should be familiar with the terms and concepts defined in
[RFC7252], [RFC7959], and [RFC8132]. Particularly, the document uses [RFC7252], [RFC7959], and [RFC8132]. Particularly, the document uses
the following key concepts: the following key concepts:
Token: is used to match responses to requests independently from the Token: used to match responses to requests independently from the
underlying messages (Section 5.3.1 of [RFC7252]). underlying messages (Section 5.3.1 of [RFC7252]).
ETag: is used as a resource-local identifier for differentiating ETag: used as a resource-local identifier for differentiating
between representations of the same resource that vary over time between representations of the same resource that vary over time
(Section 5.10.6 of [RFC7252]). (Section 5.10.6 of [RFC7252]).
The terms "payload" and "body" are defined in [RFC7959]. The term The terms "payload" and "body" are defined in [RFC7959]. The term
"payload" is thus used for the content of a single CoAP message "payload" is thus used for the content of a single CoAP message
(i.e., a single block being transferred), while the term "body" is (i.e., a single block being transferred), while the term "body" is
used for the entire resource representation that is being transferred used for the entire resource representation that is being transferred
in a block-wise fashion. in a block-wise fashion.
Request-Tag refers to an option that allows a CoAP server to match Request-Tag refers to an option that allows a CoAP server to match
message fragments belonging to the same request message fragments belonging to the same request [RFC9175].
[I-D.ietf-core-echo-request-tag].
MAX_PAYLOADS is the maximum number of payloads that can be MAX_PAYLOADS is the maximum number of payloads that can be
transmitted at any one time. transmitted at any one time.
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET is the set of blocks identified by block numbers MAX_PAYLOADS_SET is the set of blocks identified by block numbers
that, when divided by MAX_PAYLOADS, have the same numeric result. that, when divided by MAX_PAYLOADS, have the same numeric result.
For example, if MAX_PAYLOADS is set to '10', a MAX_PAYLOADS_SET could For example, if MAX_PAYLOADS is set to 10, a MAX_PAYLOADS_SET could
be blocks #0 to #9, #10 to #19, etc. Depending on the overall data be blocks #0 to #9, #10 to #19, etc. Depending on the overall data
size, there could be fewer than MAX_PAYLOADS blocks in the final size, there could be fewer than MAX_PAYLOADS blocks in the final
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. MAX_PAYLOADS_SET.
3. Alternative CoAP Block-Wise Transfer Options 3. Alternative CoAP Block-Wise Transfer Options
This document introduces the CoAP Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options. This document introduces the CoAP Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options.
These options are designed to work in particular with NON requests These options are designed to work in particular with NON requests
and responses. and responses.
Using NON messages, faster transmissions can occur as all the blocks Using NON messages, faster transmissions can occur, as all the blocks
can be transmitted serially (akin to fragmented IP packets) without can be transmitted serially (akin to fragmented IP packets) without
having to wait for a response or next request from the remote CoAP having to wait for a response or next request from the remote CoAP
peer. Recovery of missing blocks is faster in that multiple missing peer. Recovery of missing blocks is faster in that multiple missing
blocks can be requested in a single CoAP message. Even if there is blocks can be requested in a single CoAP message. Even if there is
asymmetrical packet loss, a body can still be sent and received by asymmetrical packet loss, a body can still be sent and received by
the peer whether the body comprises a single or multiple payloads, the peer whether the body comprises a single payload or multiple
assuming no recovery is required. payloads, assuming no recovery is required.
A CoAP endpoint can acknowledge all or a subset of the blocks. A CoAP endpoint can acknowledge all or a subset of the blocks.
Concretely, the receiving CoAP endpoint either informs the CoAP Concretely, the receiving CoAP endpoint either informs the sending
sender endpoint of successful reception or reports on all blocks in CoAP endpoint of successful reception or reports on all blocks in the
the body that have not yet been received. The CoAP sender endpoint body that have not yet been received. The sending CoAP endpoint will
will then retransmit only the blocks that have been lost in then retransmit only the blocks that have been lost in transmission.
transmission.
Note that similar transmission rate benefits can be applied to Note that similar transmission rate benefits can be applied to
Confirmable messages if the value of NSTART is increased from 1 Confirmable messages if the value of NSTART is increased from 1
(Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]). However, the use of Confirmable messages (Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]). However, the use of Confirmable messages
will not work effectively if there is asymmetrical packet loss. Some will not work effectively if there is asymmetrical packet loss. Some
examples with Confirmable messages are provided in Appendix A. examples with Confirmable messages are provided in Appendix A.
There is little, if any, benefit of using these options with CoAP There is little, if any, benefit of using these options with CoAP
running over a reliable connection [RFC8323]. In this case, there is running over a reliable connection [RFC8323]. In this case, there is
no differentiation between CON and NON as they are not used. Some no differentiation between CON and NON, as they are not used. Some
examples using a reliable transport are provided in Appendix B. examples using a reliable transport are provided in Appendix B.
Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options are similar in operation to the CoAP The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options are similar in operation to the
Block1 and Block2 Options, respectively. They are not a replacement CoAP Block1 and Block2 options, respectively. They are not a
for them, but have the following benefits: replacement for them but have the following benefits:
o They can operate in environments where packet loss is highly * They can operate in environments where packet loss is highly
asymmetrical. asymmetrical.
o They enable faster transmissions of sets of blocks of data with * They enable faster transmissions of sets of blocks of data with
fewer packet interchanges. fewer packet interchanges.
o They support faster recovery should any of the blocks get lost in * They support faster recovery should any of the blocks get lost in
transmission. transmission.
o They support sending an entire body using NON messages without * They support sending an entire body using NON messages without
requiring that an intermediate response be received from the peer. requiring that an intermediate response be received from the peer.
There are the following disadvantages over using CoAP Block1 and The disadvantages of using the CoAP Block1 and Block2 options are as
Block2 Options: follows:
o Loss of lock-stepping so payloads are not always received in the * There is a loss of lock-stepping, so payloads are not always
correct (block ascending) order. received in the correct order (blocks in ascending order).
o Additional congestion control measures need to be put in place for * Additional congestion control measures need to be put in place for
NON messages (Section 7.2). NON messages (Section 7.2).
o To reduce the transmission times for CON transmission of large * To reduce the transmission times for CON transmissions of large
bodies, NSTART needs to be increased from 1, but this affects bodies, NSTART needs to be increased from 1, but this affects
congestion control and incurs a requirement to re-tune other congestion control and incurs a requirement to retune other
parameters (Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]). Such tuning is out of parameters (Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]). Such tuning is out of
scope of this document. scope of this document.
o Mixing of NON and CON during requests/responses using Q-Block is * Mixing of NON and CON during an exchange of requests/responses
not supported. using Q-Block options is not supported.
o The Q-Block Options do not support stateless operation/random * The Q-Block options do not support stateless operation/random
access. access.
o Proxying of Q-Block is limited to caching full representations. * Proxying of Q-Block options is limited to caching full
representations.
o There is no multicast support. * There is no multicast support.
Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options can be used instead of Block1 and The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options can be used instead of the Block1
Block2 Options when the different transmission properties are and Block2 options when the different transmission properties are
required. If the new options are not supported by a peer, then required. If the new options are not supported by a peer, then
transmissions can fall back to using Block1 and Block2 Options transmissions can fall back to using the Block1 and Block2 options
(Section 4.1). (Section 4.1).
The deviations from Block1 and Block2 Options are specified in The deviations from the Block1 and Block2 options are specified in
Section 4. Pointers to appropriate [RFC7959] sections are provided. Section 4. Pointers to the appropriate sections in [RFC7959] are
provided.
The specification refers to the base CoAP methods defined in The specification refers to the base CoAP methods defined in
Section 5.8 of [RFC7252] and the new CoAP methods, FETCH, PATCH, and Section 5.8 of [RFC7252] and the new CoAP methods, FETCH, PATCH, and
iPATCH introduced in [RFC8132]. iPATCH, which are introduced in [RFC8132].
The No-Response Option [RFC7967] was considered but was abandoned as The No-Response option [RFC7967] was considered but was abandoned, as
it does not apply to Q-Block2 responses. A unified solution is it does not apply to Q-Block2 responses. A unified solution is
defined in the document. defined in the document.
3.1. CoAP Response Code (4.08) Usage 3.1. CoAP Response Code (4.08) Usage
This document adds a media type for the 4.08 (Request Entity This document adds a media type for the 4.08 (Request Entity
Incomplete) response defining an additional message format for Incomplete) response defining an additional message format for
reporting on payloads using the Q-Block1 Option that are not received reporting on payloads using the Q-Block1 option that are not received
by the server. by the server.
See Section 5 for more details. See Section 5 for more details.
3.2. Applicability Scope 3.2. Applicability Scope
The block-wise transfer specified in [RFC7959] covers the general The block-wise transfer specified in [RFC7959] covers the general
case using Confirmable messages, but falls short in situations where case using Confirmable messages but falls short in situations where
packet loss is highly asymmetrical or there is no need for an packet loss is highly asymmetrical or there is no need for an
acknowledgement. In other words, there is a need for Non-confirmable acknowledgment. In other words, there is a need for Non-confirmable
support. support.
The mechanism specified in this document provides roughly similar The mechanism specified in this document provides roughly similar
features to the Block1/Block2 Options. It provides additional features to the Block1/Block2 options. It provides additional
properties that are tailored towards the intended use case of Non- properties that are tailored towards the intended use case of Non-
confirmable transmission. Concretely, this mechanism primarily confirmable transmission. Concretely, this mechanism primarily
targets applications such as DDoS Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) that targets applications, such as DDoS Open Threat Signaling (DOTS), that
cannot use CON requests/responses because of potential packet loss cannot use CON requests/responses because of potential packet loss
and that support application-specific mechanisms to assess whether and that support application-specific mechanisms to assess whether
the remote peer is not overloaded and thus is able to process the the remote peer is not overloaded and thus is able to process the
messages sent by a CoAP endpoint (e.g., DOTS heartbeats in messages sent by a CoAP endpoint (e.g., DOTS heartbeats in
Section 4.7 of [RFC8782]). Other use cases are when an application Section 4.7 of [RFC9132]). Other use cases are when an application
sends data but has no need for an acknowledgement of receipt and, any sends data but has no need for an acknowledgment of receipt and any
data transmission loss is not critical. data transmission loss is not critical.
The mechanism includes guards to prevent a CoAP agent from The mechanism includes guards to prevent a CoAP agent from
overloading the network by adopting an aggressive sending rate. overloading the network by adopting an aggressive sending rate.
These guards MUST be followed in addition to the existing CoAP These guards MUST be followed in addition to the existing CoAP
congestion control as specified in Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]. See congestion control, as specified in Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]. See
Section 7 for more details. Section 7 for more details.
Any usage outside the primary use case of Non-confirmable with block Any usage outside the primary use case of Non-confirmable messages
transfers should be carefully weighed against the potential loss of with block transfers should be carefully weighed against the
interoperability with generic CoAP applications (See the potential loss of interoperability with generic CoAP applications
disadvantages listed in Section 3). It is hoped that the experience (see the disadvantages listed in Section 3). It is hoped that the
gained with this mechanism can feed future extensions of the block- experience gained with this mechanism can feed future extensions of
wise mechanism that will both be generally applicable and serve this the block-wise mechanism that will both be generally applicable and
particular use case. serve this particular use case.
It is not recommended that these options are used in a NoSec security It is not recommended that these options are used in the "NoSec"
mode (Section 9 of [RFC7252]) as the source endpoint needs to be security mode (Section 9 of [RFC7252]), as the source endpoint needs
trusted. Using OSCORE [RFC8613] does provide a security context and, to be trusted. Using Object Security for Constrained RESTful
hence, a trust of the source endpoint that prepared the inner OSCORE Environments (OSCORE) [RFC8613] does provide a security context and
content. However, even with OSCORE, using a NoSec security mode with hence a trust of the source endpoint that prepared the inner OSCORE
these options may still be inadequate, for reasons discussed in content. However, even with OSCORE, using the NoSec mode with these
Section 11. options may still be inadequate, for reasons discussed in Section 11.
4. The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options 4. The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
4.1. Properties of Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options 4.1. Properties of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
The properties of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options are shown in The properties of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options are shown in
Table 1. The formatting of this table follows the one used in Table 1. The formatting of this table follows the one used in
Table 4 of [RFC7252] (Section 5.10). The C, U, N, and R columns Table 4 of Section 5.10 of [RFC7252]. The C, U, N, and R columns
indicate the properties Critical, UnSafe, NoCacheKey, and Repeatable indicate the properties Critical, UnSafe, NoCacheKey, and Repeatable,
defined in Section 5.4 of [RFC7252]. Only Critical and UnSafe which are defined in Section 5.4 of [RFC7252]. Only the Critical and
columns are marked for the Q-Block1 Option. Critical, UnSafe, and UnSafe columns are marked for the Q-Block1 option. The Critical,
Repeatable columns are marked for the Q-Block2 Option. As these UnSafe, and Repeatable columns are marked for the Q-Block2 option.
options are UnSafe, NoCacheKey has no meaning and so is marked with a As these options are UnSafe, NoCacheKey has no meaning and so is
dash. marked with a dash.
+--------+---+---+---+---+--------------+--------+--------+---------+ +=====+===+===+===+===+==========+========+========+=========+
| Number | C | U | N | R | Name | Format | Length | Default | | No. | C | U | N | R | Name | Format | Length | Default |
+========+===+===+===+===+==============+========+========+=========+ +=====+===+===+===+===+==========+========+========+=========+
| TBA1 | x | x | - | | Q-Block1 | uint | 0-3 | (none) | | 19 | x | x | - | | Q-Block1 | uint | 0-3 | (none) |
| TBA2 | x | x | - | x | Q-Block2 | uint | 0-3 | (none) | +-----+---+---+---+---+----------+--------+--------+---------+
+--------+---+---+---+---+--------------+--------+--------+---------+ | 31 | x | x | - | x | Q-Block2 | uint | 0-3 | (none) |
+-----+---+---+---+---+----------+--------+--------+---------+
Table 1: CoAP Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Option Properties Table 1: CoAP Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Option Properties
The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options can be present in both the request The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options can be present in both the request
and response messages. The Q-Block1 Option pertains to the request and response messages. The Q-Block1 option pertains to the request
payload and the Q-Block2 Option pertains to the response payload. payload, and the Q-Block2 option pertains to the response payload.
When the Content-Format Option is present together with the Q-Block1 When the Content-Format option is present together with the Q-Block1
or Q-Block2 Option, the option applies to the body not to the payload or Q-Block2 option, the option applies to the body, not to the
(i.e., it must be the same for all payloads of the same body). payload (i.e., it must be the same for all payloads of the same
body).
The Q-Block1 Option is useful with the payload-bearing, e.g., POST, The Q-Block1 option is useful with the payload-bearing (e.g., POST,
PUT, FETCH, PATCH, and iPATCH requests and their responses. PUT, FETCH, PATCH, and iPATCH) requests and their responses.
The Q-Block2 Option is useful, e.g., with GET, POST, PUT, FETCH, The Q-Block2 option is useful, for example, with GET, POST, PUT,
PATCH, and iPATCH requests and their payload-bearing responses FETCH, PATCH, and iPATCH requests and their payload-bearing responses
(response codes 2.01, 2.02, 2.04, and 2.05) (Section 5.5 of (response codes 2.01, 2.02, 2.04, and 2.05) (Section 5.5 of
[RFC7252]). [RFC7252]).
A CoAP endpoint (or proxy) MUST support either both or neither of the A CoAP endpoint (or proxy) MUST support either both or neither of the
Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options. Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options.
If the Q-Block1 Option is present in a request or the Q-Block2 Option If the Q-Block1 option is present in a request or the Q-Block2 option
is returned in a response, this indicates a block-wise transfer and is returned in a response, this indicates a block-wise transfer and
describes how this specific block-wise payload forms part of the describes how this specific block-wise payload forms part of the
entire body being transferred. If it is present in the opposite entire body being transferred. If it is present in the opposite
direction, it provides additional control on how that payload will be direction, it provides additional control on how that payload will be
formed or was processed. formed or was processed.
To indicate support for Q-Block2 responses, the CoAP client MUST To indicate support for Q-Block2 responses, the CoAP client MUST
include the Q-Block2 Option in a GET or similar request (FETCH, for include the Q-Block2 option in a GET or similar request (e.g.,
example), the Q-Block2 Option in a PUT or similar request (POST, for FETCH), the Q-Block2 option in a PUT or similar request (e.g., POST),
example), or the Q-Block1 Option in a PUT or similar request so that or the Q-Block1 option in a PUT or similar request so that the server
the server knows that the client supports this Q-Block functionality knows that the client supports this Q-Block functionality should it
should it need to send back a body that spans multiple payloads. need to send back a body that spans multiple payloads. Otherwise,
Otherwise, the server would use the Block2 Option (if supported) to the server would use the Block2 option (if supported) to send back a
send back a message body that is too large to fit into a single IP message body that is too large to fit into a single IP packet
packet [RFC7959]. [RFC7959].
How a client decides whether it needs to include a Q-Block1 or How a client decides whether it needs to include a Q-Block1 or
Q-Block2 Option can be driven by a local configuration parameter, Q-Block2 option can be driven by a local configuration parameter,
triggered by an application (DOTS, for example), etc. Such triggered by an application (e.g., DOTS), etc. Such considerations
considerations are out of the scope of the document. are out of the scope of this document.
Implementation of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options is intended to be Implementation of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options is intended to be
optional. However, when it is present in a CoAP message, it MUST be optional. However, when a Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 option is present in
processed (or the message rejected). Therefore, Q-Block1 and a CoAP message, it MUST be processed (or the message rejected).
Q-Block2 Options are identified as Critical options. Therefore, the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options are identified as
critical options.
With CoAP over UDP, the way a request message is rejected for With CoAP over UDP, the way a request message is rejected for
critical options depends on the message type. A Confirmable message critical options depends on the message type. A Confirmable message
with an unrecognized critical option is rejected with a 4.02 (Bad with an unrecognized critical option is rejected with a 4.02 (Bad
Option) response (Section 5.4.1 of [RFC7252]). A Non-confirmable Option) response (Section 5.4.1 of [RFC7252]). A Non-confirmable
message with an unrecognized critical option is either rejected with message with an unrecognized critical option is either rejected with
a Reset message or just silently ignored (Sections 5.4.1 and 4.3 of a Reset message or just silently ignored (Sections 5.4.1 and 4.3 of
[RFC7252]). To reliably get a rejection message, it is therefore [RFC7252]). To reliably get a rejection message, it is therefore
REQUIRED that clients use a Confirmable message for determining REQUIRED that clients use a Confirmable message for determining
support for Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options. This CON message can be support for the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options. This Confirmable
sent under the base CoAP congestion control setup specified in message can be sent under the base CoAP congestion control setup
Section 4.7 of [RFC7252] (that is, NSTART does not need to be specified in Section 4.7 of [RFC7252] (that is, NSTART does not need
increased (Section 7.1)). to be increased (Section 7.1)).
The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options are unsafe to forward. That is, a The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options are unsafe to forward. That is, a
CoAP proxy that does not understand the Q-Block1 (or Q-Block2) Option CoAP proxy that does not understand the Q-Block1 (or Q-Block2) option
must reject the request or response that uses either option (See must reject the request or response that uses either option (see
Section 5.7.1 of [RFC7252]). Section 5.7.1 of [RFC7252]).
The Q-Block2 Option is repeatable when requesting retransmission of The Q-Block2 option is repeatable when requesting retransmission of
missing blocks, but not otherwise. Except that case, any request missing blocks but not otherwise. Except for that case, any request
carrying multiple Q-Block1 (or Q-Block2) Options MUST be handled carrying multiple Q-Block1 (or Q-Block2) options MUST be handled
following the procedure specified in Section 5.4.5 of [RFC7252]. following the procedure specified in Section 5.4.5 of [RFC7252].
The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options, like the Block1 and Block2 The Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options, like the Block1 and Block2
Options, are of both class E and class U for OSCORE processing options, are of both class E and class U for OSCORE processing
(Table 2). The Q-Block1 (or Q-Block2) Option MAY be an Inner or (Table 2). The Q-Block1 (or Q-Block2) option MAY be an Inner or
Outer option (Section 4.1 of [RFC8613]). The Inner and Outer values Outer option (Section 4.1 of [RFC8613]). The Inner and Outer values
are therefore independent of each other. The Inner option is are therefore independent of each other. The Inner option is
encrypted and integrity protected between clients and servers, and encrypted and integrity protected between clients and servers and
provides message body identification in case of end-to-end provides message body identification in case of end-to-end
fragmentation of requests. The Outer option is visible to proxies fragmentation of requests. The Outer option is visible to proxies
and labels message bodies in case of hop-by-hop fragmentation of and labels message bodies in case of hop-by-hop fragmentation of
requests. requests.
+--------+-----------------+---+---+ +========+==========+===+===+
| Number | Name | E | U | | Number | Name | E | U |
+========+=================+===+===+ +========+==========+===+===+
| TBA1 | Q-Block1 | x | x | | 19 | Q-Block1 | x | x |
| TBA2 | Q-Block2 | x | x | +--------+----------+---+---+
+--------+-----------------+---+---+ | 31 | Q-Block2 | x | x |
Table 2: OSCORE Protection of Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options +--------+----------+---+---+
Note that if Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 Options are included in a packet as Table 2: OSCORE
Inner options, Block1 or Block2 Options MUST NOT be included as Inner Protection of the
options. Similarly, there MUST NOT be a mix of Q-Block and Block for Q-Block1 and Q-Block2
the Outer options. Messages that do not adhere with this behavior Options
MUST be rejected with 4.02 (Bad Option). Q-Block and Block Options
can be mixed across Inner and Outer options as these are handled
independently of each other. For clarity, if OSCORE is not being
used, there MUST NOT be a mix of Q-Block and Block Options in the
same packet.
4.2. Structure of Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Note that, if the Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 options are included in a
packet as Inner options, the Block1 or Block2 options MUST NOT be
included as Inner options. Similarly, there MUST NOT be a mix of
Q-Block and Block options for the Outer options. Messages that do
not adhere to this behavior MUST be rejected with a 4.02 (Bad
Option). The Q-Block and Block options can be mixed across Inner and
Outer options, as these are handled independently of each other. For
clarity, if OSCORE is not being used, there MUST NOT be a mix of
Q-Block and Block options in the same packet.
The structure of Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options follows the structure 4.2. Structure of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
defined in Section 2.2 of [RFC7959].
There is no default value for the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options. The structure of the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options follows the
Absence of one of these options is equivalent to an option value of 0 structure defined in Section 2.2 of [RFC7959].
There is no default value for the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options. The
absence of one of these options is equivalent to an option value of 0
with respect to the value of block number (NUM) and more bit (M) that with respect to the value of block number (NUM) and more bit (M) that
could be given in the option, i.e., it indicates that the current could be given in the option, i.e., it indicates that the current
block is the first and only block of the transfer (block number is block is the first and only block of the transfer (block number is
set to 0, M is unset). However, in contrast to the explicit value 0, set to 0; M is unset). However, in contrast to the explicit value 0,
which would indicate a size of the block (SZX) of 0, and thus a size which would indicate a size of the block (SZX) of 0, and thus a size
value of 16 bytes, there is no specific explicit size implied by the value of 16 bytes, there is no specific size implied by the absence
absence of the option -- the size is left unspecified. (As for any of the option -- the size is left unspecified. (As for any uint, the
uint, the explicit value 0 is efficiently indicated by a zero-length explicit value 0 is efficiently indicated by a zero-length option;
option; this, therefore, is different in semantics from the absence therefore, this is semantically different from the absence of the
of the option). option.)
4.3. Using the Q-Block1 Option 4.3. Using the Q-Block1 Option
The Q-Block1 Option is used when the client wants to send a large The Q-Block1 option is used when the client wants to send a large
amount of data to the server using the POST, PUT, FETCH, PATCH, or amount of data to the server using the POST, PUT, FETCH, PATCH, or
iPATCH methods where the data and headers do not fit into a single iPATCH methods where the data and headers do not fit into a single
packet. packet.
When Q-Block1 Option is used, the client MUST include a Request-Tag When the Q-Block1 option is used, the client MUST include a Request-
Option [I-D.ietf-core-echo-request-tag]. The Request-Tag value MUST Tag option [RFC9175]. The Request-Tag value MUST be the same for all
be the same for all of the requests for the body of data that is of the requests for the body of data that is being transferred. The
being transferred. The Request-Tag is opaque, but the client MUST Request-Tag is opaque, but the client MUST ensure that it is unique
ensure that it is unique for every different body of transmitted for every different body of transmitted data.
data.
Implementation Note: It is suggested that the client treats the Implementation Note: It is suggested that the client treats the
Request-Tag as an unsigned integer of 8 bytes in length. An Request-Tag as an unsigned integer of 8 bytes in length. An
implementation may want to consider limiting this to 4 bytes to implementation may want to consider limiting this to 4 bytes to
reduce packet overhead size. The initial Request-Tag value should reduce packet overhead size. The initial Request-Tag value should
be randomly generated and then subsequently incremented by the be randomly generated and then subsequently incremented by the
client whenever a new body of data is being transmitted between client whenever a new body of data is being transmitted between
peers. peers.
Section 4.6 discusses the use of Size1 Option. Section 4.6 discusses the use of the Size1 option.
For Confirmable transmission, the server continues to acknowledge For Confirmable transmission, the server continues to acknowledge
each packet, but a response is not required (whether separate or each packet, but a response is not required (whether separate or
piggybacked) until successful receipt of the body by the server. For piggybacked) until successful receipt of the body by the server. For
Non-confirmable transmission, no response is required until either Non-confirmable transmission, no response is required until either
the successful receipt of the body by the server or a timer expires the successful receipt of the body by the server or a timer expires
with some of the payloads having not yet arrived. In the latter with some of the payloads having not yet arrived. In the latter
case, a "retransmit missing payloads" response is needed. For case, a "retransmit missing payloads" response is needed. For
reliable transports (e.g., [RFC8323]), a response is not required reliable transports (e.g., [RFC8323]), a response is not required
until successful receipt of the body by the server. until successful receipt of the body by the server.
Each individual message that carries a block of the body is treated Each individual message that carries a block of the body is treated
as a new request (Section 6). as a new request (Section 6).
The client MUST send the payloads in order of increasing block The client MUST send the payloads in order of increasing block
number, starting from zero, until the body is complete (subject to number, starting from zero, until the body is complete (subject to
any congestion control (Section 7)). Any missing payloads requested any congestion control (Section 7)). In addition, any missing
by the server must in addition be separately transmitted with payloads requested by the server must be separately transmitted with
increasing block numbers. increasing block numbers.
The following Response Codes are used: The following response codes are used:
2.01 (Created) 2.01 (Created)
This response code indicates successful receipt of the entire body
This Response Code indicates successful receipt of the entire body
and that the resource was created. The token to use MUST be one and that the resource was created. The token to use MUST be one
of the tokens that were received in a request for this block-wise of the tokens that were received in a request for this block-wise
exchange. However, it is desirable to provide the one used in the exchange. However, it is desirable to provide the one used in the
last received request, since that will aid any troubleshooting. last received request, since that will aid any troubleshooting.
The client should then release all of the tokens used for this The client should then release all of the tokens used for this
body. Note that the last received payload might not be the one body. Note that the last received payload might not be the one
with the highest block number. with the highest block number.
2.02 (Deleted) 2.02 (Deleted)
This response code indicates successful receipt of the entire body
This Response Code indicates successful receipt of the entire body
and that the resource was deleted when using POST (Section 5.8.2 and that the resource was deleted when using POST (Section 5.8.2
[RFC7252]). The token to use MUST be one of the tokens that were of [RFC7252]). The token to use MUST be one of the tokens that
received in a request for this block-wise exchange. However, it were received in a request for this block-wise exchange. However,
is desirable to provide the one used in the last received request. it is desirable to provide the one used in the last received
The client should then release all of the tokens used for this request. The client should then release all of the tokens used
body. for this body.
2.04 (Changed) 2.04 (Changed)
This response code indicates successful receipt of the entire body
This Response Code indicates successful receipt of the entire body
and that the resource was updated. The token to use MUST be one and that the resource was updated. The token to use MUST be one
of the tokens that were received in a request for this block-wise of the tokens that were received in a request for this block-wise
exchange. However, it is desirable to provide the one used in the exchange. However, it is desirable to provide the one used in the
last received request. The client should then release all of the last received request. The client should then release all of the
tokens used for this body. tokens used for this body.
2.05 (Content) 2.05 (Content)
This response code indicates successful receipt of the entire
This Response Code indicates successful receipt of the entire
FETCH request body (Section 2 of [RFC8132]) and that the FETCH request body (Section 2 of [RFC8132]) and that the
appropriate representation of the resource is being returned. The appropriate representation of the resource is being returned. The
token to use MUST be one of the tokens that were received in a token to use MUST be one of the tokens that were received in a
request for this block-wise exchange. However, it is desirable to request for this block-wise exchange. However, it is desirable to
provide the one used in the last received request. provide the one used in the last received request.
If the FETCH request includes the Observe Option, then the server If the FETCH request includes the Observe option, then the server
MUST use the same token as used for the 2.05 (Content) response MUST use the same token as used for the 2.05 (Content) response
for returning any Observe triggered responses so that the client for returning any triggered Observe responses so that the client
can match them up. can match them up.
The client should then release all of the tokens used for this The client should then release all of the tokens used for this
body apart from the one used for tracking an observed resource. body apart from the one used for tracking an observed resource.
2.31 (Continue) 2.31 (Continue)
This Response Code can be used to indicate that all of the blocks This response code can be used to indicate that all of the blocks
up to and including the Q-Block1 Option block NUM (all having the up to and including the Q-Block1 option block NUM (all having the
M bit set) have been successfully received. The token to use MUST M bit set) have been successfully received. The token to use MUST
be one of the tokens that were received in a request for this be one of the tokens that were received in a request for this
latest MAX_PAYLOADS_SET block-wise exchange. However, it is latest MAX_PAYLOADS_SET block-wise exchange. However, it is
desirable to provide the one used in the last received request. desirable to provide the one used in the last received request.
The client should then release all of the tokens used for this The client should then release all of the tokens used for this
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. MAX_PAYLOADS_SET.
A response using this Response Code MUST NOT be generated for A response using this response code MUST NOT be generated for
every received Q-Block1 Option request. It SHOULD only be every received Q-Block1 option request. It SHOULD only be
generated when all the payload requests are Non-confirmable and a generated when all the payload requests are Non-confirmable and a
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received by the server. More details MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received by the server. More details
about the motivations for this optimization are discussed in about the motivations for this optimization are discussed in
Section 7.2. Section 7.2.
This Response Code SHOULD NOT be generated for CON as this may This response code SHOULD NOT be generated for CON, as this may
cause duplicated payloads to unnecessarily be sent. cause duplicated payloads to unnecessarily be sent.
4.00 (Bad Request) 4.00 (Bad Request)
This response code MUST be returned if the request does not
This Response Code MUST be returned if the request does not include a Request-Tag option or a Size1 option but does include a
include a Request-Tag Option or a Size1 Option but does include a
Q-Block1 option. Q-Block1 option.
4.02 (Bad Option) 4.02 (Bad Option)
This response code MUST be returned for a Confirmable request if
This Response Code MUST be returned for a Confirmable request if the server does not support the Q-Block options. Note that a
the server does not support the Q-Block Options. Note that a Reset message may be sent in case of a Non-confirmable request.
reset message may be sent in case of Non-confirmable request.
4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete)
As a reminder, this response code returned without content type
As a reminder, this Response Code returned without Content-Type
"application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" (Section 12.3) is handled as "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" (Section 12.3) is handled as
in Section 2.9.2 [RFC7959]. in Section 2.9.2 of [RFC7959].
This Response Code returned with Content-Type "application/ This response code returned with content type "application/
missing-blocks+cbor-seq" indicates that some of the payloads are missing-blocks+cbor-seq" indicates that some of the payloads are
missing and need to be resent. The client then retransmits the missing and need to be resent. The client then retransmits the
individual missing payloads using the same Request-Tag, Size1, individual missing payloads using the same Request-Tag, Size1, and
and, Q-Block1 Option to specify the same NUM, SZX, and M bit as Q-Block1 options to specify the same NUM, SZX, and M bit values as
sent initially in the original, but not received, packet. those sent initially in the original (but not received) packets.
The Request-Tag value to use is determined by taking the token in The Request-Tag value to use is determined by taking the token in
the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response, locating the the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response, locating the
matching client request, and then using its Request-Tag. matching client request, and then using its Request-Tag.
The token to use in the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response The token to use in the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response
MUST be one of the tokens that were received in a request for this MUST be one of the tokens that were received in a request for this
block-wise body exchange. However, it is desirable to provide the block-wise body exchange. However, it is desirable to provide the
one used in the last received request. See Section 5 for further one used in the last received request. See Section 5 for further
information. information.
If the server has not received all the blocks of a body, but one If the server has not received all the blocks of a body, but one
or more NON payloads have been received, it SHOULD wait for or more NON payloads have been received, it SHOULD wait for
NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (Section 7.2) before sending a 4.08 (Request NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (Section 7.2) before sending a 4.08 (Request
Entity Incomplete) response. Entity Incomplete) response.
4.13 (Request Entity Too Large) 4.13 (Request Entity Too Large)
This response code can be returned under conditions similar to
This Response Code can be returned under similar conditions to
those discussed in Section 2.9.3 of [RFC7959]. those discussed in Section 2.9.3 of [RFC7959].
This Response Code can be returned if there is insufficient space This response code can be returned if there is insufficient space
to create a response PDU with a block size of 16 bytes (SZX = 0) to create a response PDU with a block size of 16 bytes (SZX = 0)
to send back all the response options as appropriate. In this to send back all the response options as appropriate. In this
case, the Size1 Option is not included in the response. case, the Size1 option is not included in the response.
Further considerations related to the transmission timings of 4.08 Further considerations related to the transmission timings of the
(Request Entity Incomplete) and 2.31 (Continue) Response Codes are 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) and 2.31 (Continue) response codes
discussed in Section 7.2. are discussed in Section 7.2.
If a server receives payloads with different Request-Tags for the If a server receives payloads with different Request-Tags for the
same resource, it should continue to process all the bodies as it has same resource, it should continue to process all the bodies, as it
no way of determining which is the latest version, or which body, if has no way of determining which is the latest version or which body,
any, the client is terminating the transmission for. if any, the client is terminating the transmission for.
If the client elects to stop the transmission of a complete body, and If the client elects to stop the transmission of a complete body,
absent any local policy, the client MUST "forget" all tracked tokens then absent any local policy, the client MUST "forget" all tracked
associated with the body's Request-Tag so that a reset message is tokens associated with the body's Request-Tag so that a Reset message
generated for the invalid token in the 4.08 (Request Entity is generated for the invalid token in the 4.08 (Request Entity
Incomplete) response. The server on receipt of the reset message Incomplete) response. On receipt of the Reset message, the server
SHOULD delete the partial body. SHOULD delete the partial body.
If the server receives a duplicate block with the same Request-Tag, If the server receives a duplicate block with the same Request-Tag,
it MUST ignore the payload of the packet, but MUST still respond as it MUST ignore the payload of the packet but MUST still respond as if
if the block was received for the first time. the block was received for the first time.
A server SHOULD maintain a partial body (missing payloads) for A server SHOULD maintain a partial body (missing payloads) for
NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT (Section 7.2). NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT (Section 7.2).
4.4. Using the Q-Block2 Option 4.4. Using the Q-Block2 Option
In a request for any block number, the M bit unset indicates the In a request for any block number, an unset M bit indicates the
request is just for that block. If the M bit is set, this has request is just for that block. If the M bit is set, this has
different meanings based on the NUM value: different meanings based on the NUM value:
NUM is zero: This is a request for the entire body. NUM is zero: This is a request for the entire body.
'NUM modulo MAX_PAYLOADS' is zero, while NUM is not zero: This is 'NUM modulo MAX_PAYLOADS' is zero, while NUM is not zero: This is
used to confirm that the current MAX_PAYLOADS_SET (the latest used to confirm that the current MAX_PAYLOADS_SET (the latest
block having block number NUM-1) has been successfully received block having block number NUM-1) has been successfully received
and that, upon receipt of this request, the server can continue to and that, upon receipt of this request, the server can continue to
send the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET (the first block having block send the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET (the first block having block
number NUM). This is the 'Continue' Q-Block-2 and conceptually number NUM). This is the 'Continue' Q-Block-2 and conceptually
has the same usage (i.e., continue sending the next set of data) has the same usage (i.e., continue sending the next set of data)
as the use of 2.31 (Continue) for Q-Block1. as the use of 2.31 (Continue) for Q-Block1.
Any other value of NUM: This is a request for that block and for all Any other value of NUM: This is a request for that block and for all
of the remaining blocks in the current MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. of the remaining blocks in the current MAX_PAYLOADS_SET.
If the request includes multiple Q-Block2 Options and these options If the request includes multiple Q-Block2 options and these options
overlap (e.g., combination of M being set (this and later blocks) and overlap (e.g., combination of M being set (this and later blocks) and
being unset (this individual block)) resulting in an individual block unset (this individual block)), resulting in an individual block
being requested multiple times, the server MUST only send back one being requested multiple times, the server MUST only send back one
instance of that block. This behavior is meant to prevent instance of that block. This behavior is meant to prevent
amplification attacks. amplification attacks.
The payloads sent back from the server as a response MUST all have The payloads sent back from the server as a response MUST all have
the same ETag (Section 5.10.6 of [RFC7252]) for the same body. The the same ETag (Section 5.10.6 of [RFC7252]) for the same body. The
server MUST NOT use the same ETag value for different representations server MUST NOT use the same ETag value for different representations
of a resource. of a resource.
The ETag is opaque, but the server MUST ensure that it is unique for The ETag is opaque, but the server MUST ensure that it is unique for
every different body of transmitted data. every different body of transmitted data.
Implementation Note: It is suggested that the server treats the Implementation Note: It is suggested that the server treats the
ETag as an unsigned integer of 8 bytes in length. An ETag as an unsigned integer of 8 bytes in length. An
implementation may want to consider limiting this to 4 bytes to implementation may want to consider limiting this to 4 bytes to
reduce packet overhead size. The initial ETag value should be reduce packet overhead size. The initial ETag value should be
randomly generated and then subsequently incremented by the server randomly generated and then subsequently incremented by the server
whenever a new body of data is being transmitted between peers. whenever a new body of data is being transmitted between peers.
Section 4.6 discusses the use of Size2 Option. Section 4.6 discusses the use of the Size2 option.
The client may elect to request any detected missing blocks or just The client may elect to request any detected missing blocks or just
ignore the partial body. This decision is implementation specific. ignore the partial body. This decision is implementation specific.
For NON payloads, the client SHOULD wait NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT For NON payloads, the client SHOULD wait for NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT
(Section 7.2) after the last received payload before requesting (Section 7.2) after the last received payload before requesting
retransmission of any missing blocks. Retransmission is requested by retransmission of any missing blocks. Retransmission is requested by
issuing a GET, POST, PUT, FETCH, PATCH, or iPATCH request that issuing a GET, POST, PUT, FETCH, PATCH, or iPATCH request that
contains one or more Q-Block2 Options that define the missing contains one or more Q-Block2 options that define the missing
block(s). Generally the M bit on the Q-Block2 Option(s) SHOULD be block(s). Generally, the M bit on the Q-Block2 option(s) SHOULD be
unset, although the M bit MAY be set to request this and later blocks unset, although the M bit MAY be set to request this and later blocks
from this MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, see Section 10.2.4 for an example of this from this MAX_PAYLOADS_SET; see Section 10.2.4 for an example of this
in operation. Further considerations related to the transmission in operation. Further considerations related to the transmission
timing for missing requests are discussed in Section 7.2. timing for missing requests are discussed in Section 7.2.
The missing block numbers requested by the client MUST have an The missing block numbers requested by the client MUST have an
increasing block number in each additional Q-Block2 Option with no increasing block number in each additional Q-Block2 option with no
duplicates. The server SHOULD respond with a 4.00 (Bad Request) to duplicates. The server SHOULD respond with a 4.00 (Bad Request) to
requests not adhering to this behavior. Note that the ordering requests not adhering to this behavior. Note that the ordering
constraint is meant to force the client to check for duplicates and constraint is meant to force the client to check for duplicates and
remove them. This also helps with troubleshooting. remove them. This also helps with troubleshooting.
If the client receives a duplicate block with the same ETag, it MUST If the client receives a duplicate block with the same ETag, it MUST
silently ignore the payload. silently ignore the payload.
A client SHOULD maintain a partial body (missing payloads) for A client SHOULD maintain a partial body (missing payloads) for
NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT (Section 7.2) or as defined by the Max-Age Option NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT (Section 7.2) or as defined by the Max-Age option
(or its default of 60 seconds (Section 5.6.1 of [RFC7252])), (or its default of 60 seconds (Section 5.6.1 of [RFC7252])),
whichever is the less. On release of the partial body, the client whichever is less. On release of the partial body, the client should
should then release all of the tokens used for this body apart from then release all of the tokens used for this body apart from the
the token that is used to track a resource that is being observed. token that is used to track a resource that is being observed.
The ETag Option should not be used in the request for missing blocks The ETag option should not be used in the request for missing blocks,
as the server could respond with a 2.03 (Valid) response with no as the server could respond with a 2.03 (Valid) response with no
payload. It can be used in the request if the client wants to check payload. It can be used in the request if the client wants to check
the freshness of the locally cached body response. the freshness of the locally cached body response.
The server SHOULD maintain a cached copy of the body when using the The server SHOULD maintain a cached copy of the body when using the
Q-Block2 Option to facilitate retransmission of any missing payloads. Q-Block2 option to facilitate retransmission of any missing payloads.
If the server detects part way through a body transfer that the If the server detects partway through a body transfer that the
resource data has changed and the server is not maintaining a cached resource data has changed and the server is not maintaining a cached
copy of the old data, then the transmission is terminated. Any copy of the old data, then the transmission is terminated. Any
subsequent missing block requests MUST be responded to using the subsequent missing block requests MUST be responded to using the
latest ETag and Size2 Option values with the updated data. latest ETag and Size2 option values with the updated data.
If the server responds during a body update with a different ETag If the server responds during a body update with a different ETag
Option value (as the resource representation has changed), then the option value (as the resource representation has changed), then the
client should treat the partial body with the old ETag as no longer client should treat the partial body with the old ETag as no longer
being fresh. The client may then request all of the new data by being fresh. The client may then request all of the new data by
specifying Q-Block2 with block number '0' and the M bit set. specifying Q-Block2 with block number '0' and the M bit set.
If the server transmits a new body of data (e.g., a triggered Observe If the server transmits a new body of data (e.g., a triggered Observe
notification) with a new ETag to the same client as an additional notification) with a new ETag to the same client as an additional
response, the client should remove any partially received body held response, the client should remove any partially received body held
for a previous ETag for that resource as it is unlikely the missing for a previous ETag for that resource, as it is unlikely the missing
blocks can be retrieved. blocks can be retrieved.
If there is insufficient space to create a response PDU with a block If there is insufficient space to create a response PDU with a block
size of 16 bytes (SZX = 0) to send back all the response options as size of 16 bytes (SZX = 0) to send back all the response options as
appropriate, a 4.13 (Request Entity Too Large) is returned without appropriate, a 4.13 (Request Entity Too Large) is returned without
the Size1 Option. the Size1 option.
For Confirmable traffic, the server typically acknowledges the For Confirmable traffic, the server typically acknowledges the
initial request using an ACK with a piggybacked payload, and then initial request using an Acknowledgment (ACK) with a piggybacked
sends the subsequent payloads of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET as CON payload and then sends the subsequent payloads of the
responses. These CON responses are individually ACKed by the client. MAX_PAYLOADS_SET as CON responses. These CON responses are
The server will detect failure to send a packet and SHOULD terminate individually ACKed by the client. The server will detect failure to
the body transfer, but the client can issue, after a send a packet and SHOULD terminate the body transfer, but the client
MAX_TRANSMIT_SPAN delay, a separate GET, POST, PUT, FETCH, PATCH, or can issue, after a MAX_TRANSMIT_SPAN delay, a separate GET, POST,
iPATCH for any missing blocks as needed. PUT, FETCH, PATCH, or iPATCH for any missing blocks as needed.
4.5. Using Observe Option 4.5. Using the Observe Option
For a request that uses Q-Block1, the Observe value [RFC7641] MUST be For a request that uses Q-Block1, the Observe value [RFC7641] MUST be
the same for all the payloads of the same body. This includes any the same for all the payloads of the same body. This includes any
missing payloads that are retransmitted. missing payloads that are retransmitted.
For a response that uses Q-Block2, the Observe value MUST be the same For a response that uses Q-Block2, the Observe value MUST be the same
for all the payloads of the same body. This is different from Block2 for all the payloads of the same body. This is different from Block2
usage where the Observe value is only present in the first block usage where the Observe value is only present in the first block
(Section 3.4 of [RFC7959]). This includes payloads transmitted (Section 3.4 of [RFC7959]). This includes payloads transmitted
following receipt of the 'Continue' Q-Block2 Option (Section 4.4) by following receipt of the 'Continue' Q-Block2 option (Section 4.4) by
the server. If a missing payload is requested by a client, then both the server. If a missing payload is requested by a client, then both
the request and response MUST NOT include the Observe Option. the request and response MUST NOT include the Observe option.
4.6. Using Size1 and Size2 Options 4.6. Using the Size1 and Size2 Options
Section 4 of [RFC7959] defines two CoAP options: Size1 for indicating Section 4 of [RFC7959] defines two CoAP options: Size1 for indicating
the size of the representation transferred in requests and Size2 for the size of the representation transferred in requests and Size2 for
indicating the size of the representation transferred in responses. indicating the size of the representation transferred in responses.
For Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options, the Size1 or Size2 Option values For the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options, the Size1 or Size2 option
MUST exactly represent the size of the data on the body so that any values MUST exactly represent the size of the data on the body so
missing data can easily be determined. that any missing data can easily be determined.
The Size1 Option MUST be used with the Q-Block1 Option when used in a The Size1 option MUST be used with the Q-Block1 option when used in a
request and MUST be present in all payloads of the request, request and MUST be present in all payloads of the request,
preserving the same value. The Size2 Option MUST be used with the preserving the same value. The Size2 option MUST be used with the
Q-Block2 Option when used in a response and MUST be present in all Q-Block2 option when used in a response and MUST be present in all
payloads of the response, preserving the same value. payloads of the response, preserving the same value.
4.7. Using Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Together 4.7. Using the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Together
The behavior is similar to the one defined in Section 3.3 of The behavior is similar to the one defined in Section 3.3 of
[RFC7959] with Q-Block1 substituted for Block1 and Q-Block2 for [RFC7959] with Q-Block1 substituted for Block1 and Q-Block2
Block2. substituted for Block2.
4.8. Using Q-Block2 Option With Multicast 4.8. Using the Q-Block2 Option with Multicast
Servers MUST ignore multicast requests that contain the Q-Block2 Servers MUST ignore multicast requests that contain the Q-Block2
Option. As a reminder, Block2 Option can be used as stated in option. As a reminder, the Block2 option can be used as stated in
Section 2.8 of [RFC7959]. Section 2.8 of [RFC7959].
5. The Use of 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) Response Code 5. The Use of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) Response Code
4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) Response Code has a new Content-Type The 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response code has a new content
"application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" used to indicate that the type "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" used to indicate that the
server has not received all of the blocks of the request body that it server has not received all of the blocks of the request body that it
needs to proceed. Such messages must not be treated by the client as needs to proceed. Such messages must not be treated by the client as
a fatal error. a fatal error.
Likely causes are the client has not sent all blocks, some blocks Likely causes are the client has not sent all blocks, some blocks
were dropped during transmission, or the client has sent them were dropped during transmission, or the client sent them a long
sufficiently long ago that the server has already discarded them. enough time ago that the server has already discarded them.
The new data payload of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response The new data payload of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response
with Content-Type set to "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" is with content type "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" is encoded as
encoded as a CBOR Sequence [RFC8742]. It comprises one or more a Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Sequence [RFC8742]. It
missing block numbers encoded as CBOR unsigned integers [RFC8949]. comprises one or more missing block numbers encoded as CBOR unsigned
The missing block numbers MUST be unique in each 4.08 (Request Entity integers [RFC8949]. The missing block numbers MUST be unique in each
Incomplete) response when created by the server; the client MUST 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response when created by the server;
ignore any duplicates in the same 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) the client MUST ignore any duplicates in the same 4.08 (Request
response. Entity Incomplete) response.
The Content-Format Option (Section 5.10.3 of [RFC7252]) MUST be used The Content-Format option (Section 5.10.3 of [RFC7252]) MUST be used
in the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response. It MUST be set to in the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response. It MUST be set to
"application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" (Section 12.3). "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" (Section 12.3).
The Concise Data Definition Language [RFC8610] (and see Section 4.1 The Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL) [RFC8610] (and see
[RFC8742]) for the data describing these missing blocks is as Section 4.1 of [RFC8742]) for the data describing these missing
follows: blocks is as follows:
; This defines an array, the elements of which are to be used ; This defines an array, the elements of which are to be used
; in a CBOR Sequence: ; in a CBOR Sequence:
payload = [+ missing-block-number] payload = [+ missing-block-number]
; A unique block number not received: ; A unique block number not received:
missing-block-number = uint missing-block-number = uint
Figure 1: Structure of the Missing Blocks Payload Figure 1: Structure of the Missing Blocks Payload
This CDDL syntax MUST be followed. This CDDL syntax MUST be followed.
It is desirable that the token to use for the response is the token It is desirable that the token to use for the response is the token
that was used in the last block number received so far with the same that was used in the last block number received so far with the same
Request-Tag value. Note that the use of any received token with the Request-Tag value. Note that the use of any received token with the
same Request-Tag would be acceptable, but providing the one used in same Request-Tag would be acceptable, but providing the one used in
the last received payload will aid any troubleshooting. The client the last received payload will aid any troubleshooting. The client
will use the token to determine what was the previously sent request will use the token to determine what was the previously sent request
to obtain the Request-Tag value that was used. to obtain the Request-Tag value that was used.
If the size of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response packet If the size of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response packet
is larger than that defined by Section 4.6 [RFC7252], then the number is larger than that defined by Section 4.6 of [RFC7252], then the
of reported missing blocks MUST be limited so that the response can number of reported missing blocks MUST be limited so that the
fit into a single packet. If this is the case, then the server can response can fit into a single packet. If this is the case, then the
send subsequent 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) responses containing server can send subsequent 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) responses
the missing other blocks on receipt of a new request providing a containing those additional missing blocks on receipt of a new
missing payload with the same Request-Tag. request providing a missing payload with the same Request-Tag.
The missing blocks MUST be reported in ascending order without any The missing blocks MUST be reported in ascending order without any
duplicates. The client SHOULD silently drop 4.08 (Request Entity duplicates. The client SHOULD silently drop 4.08 (Request Entity
Incomplete) responses not adhering with this behavior. Incomplete) responses not adhering to this behavior.
Implementation Note: Consider limiting the number of missing Implementation Note: Consider limiting the number of missing
payloads to MAX_PAYLOADS to minimize congestion control being payloads to MAX_PAYLOADS to minimize the need for congestion
needed. The CBOR sequence does not include any array wrapper. control. The CBOR Sequence does not include any array wrapper.
The 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) with Content-Type "application/ A 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response with content type
missing-blocks+cbor-seq" SHOULD NOT be used when using Confirmable "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" SHOULD NOT be used when using
requests or a reliable connection [RFC8323] as the client will be Confirmable requests or a reliable connection [RFC8323], as the
able to determine that there is a transmission failure of a client will be able to determine that there is a transmission failure
particular payload and hence that the server is missing that payload. of a particular payload and hence that the server is missing that
payload.
6. The Use of Tokens 6. The Use of Tokens
Each new request generally uses a new Token (and sometimes must, see Each new request generally uses a new Token (and sometimes must; see
Section 4 of [I-D.ietf-core-echo-request-tag]). Additional responses Section 4 of [RFC9175]). Additional responses to a request all use
to a request all use the token of the request they respond to. the token of the request they respond to.
Implementation Note: By using 8-byte tokens, it is possible to Implementation Note: By using 8-byte tokens, it is possible to
easily minimize the number of tokens that have to be tracked by easily minimize the number of tokens that have to be tracked by
clients, by keeping the bottom 32 bits the same for the same body clients, by keeping the bottom 32 bits the same for the same body
and the upper 32 bits containing the current body's request number and the upper 32 bits containing the current body's request number
(incrementing every request, including every re-transmit). This (incrementing every request, including every retransmit). This
allows the client to be alleviated from keeping all the per- alleviates the client's need to keep all the per-request state,
request-state, e.g., in Section 3 of [RFC8974]. However, if using e.g., per Section 3 of [RFC8974]. However, if using NoSec,
NoSec, Section 5.2 of [RFC8974] needs to be considered for Section 5.2 of [RFC8974] needs to be considered for security
security implications. implications.
7. Congestion Control for Unreliable Transports 7. Congestion Control for Unreliable Transports
The transmission of all the blocks of a single body over an The transmission of all the blocks of a single body over an
unreliable transport MUST either all be Confirmable or all be Non- unreliable transport MUST either all be Confirmable or all be Non-
confirmable. This is meant to simplify the congestion control confirmable. This is meant to simplify the congestion control
procedure. procedure.
As a reminder, there is no need for CoAP-specific congestion control As a reminder, there is no need for CoAP-specific congestion control
for reliable transports [RFC8323]. for reliable transports [RFC8323].
skipping to change at page 20, line 41 skipping to change at line 936
and Q-Block2 will be Non-confirmable (Section 3.2) apart from the and Q-Block2 will be Non-confirmable (Section 3.2) apart from the
initial Q-Block functionality negotiation. initial Q-Block functionality negotiation.
Following the failure to transmit a packet due to packet loss after Following the failure to transmit a packet due to packet loss after
MAX_TRANSMIT_SPAN time (Section 4.8.2 of [RFC7252]), it is MAX_TRANSMIT_SPAN time (Section 4.8.2 of [RFC7252]), it is
implementation specific as to whether there should be any further implementation specific as to whether there should be any further
requests for missing data. requests for missing data.
7.2. Non-confirmable (NON) 7.2. Non-confirmable (NON)
This document introduces new parameters MAX_PAYLOADS, NON_TIMEOUT, This document introduces the new parameters MAX_PAYLOADS,
NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM, NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT, NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, NON_TIMEOUT, NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM, NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT,
NON_PROBING_WAIT, and NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT primarily for use with NON NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, NON_PROBING_WAIT, and NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT
(Table 3). primarily for use with NON (Table 3).
Note: Randomness may naturally be provided based on the traffic Note: Randomness may naturally be provided based on the traffic
profile, how PROBING_RATE is computed (as this is an average), and profile, how PROBING_RATE is computed (as this is an average), and
when the peer responds. Randomness is explicitly added for some when the peer responds. Randomness is explicitly added for some
of the congestion control parameters to handle situations where of the congestion control parameters to handle situations where
every thing is in sync when retrying. everything is in sync when retrying.
MAX_PAYLOADS should be configurable with a default value of 10. Both MAX_PAYLOADS should be configurable with a default value of 10. Both
CoAP endpoints MUST have the same value (otherwise there will be CoAP endpoints MUST have the same value (otherwise, there will be
transmission delays in one direction) and the value MAY be negotiated transmission delays in one direction), and the value MAY be
between the endpoints to a common value by using a higher level negotiated between the endpoints to a common value by using a higher-
protocol (out of scope of this document). This is the maximum number level protocol (out of scope of this document). This is the maximum
of payloads that can be transmitted at any one time. number of payloads that can be transmitted at any one time.
Note: The default value of 10 is chosen for reasons similar to Note: The default value of 10 is chosen for reasons similar to
those discussed in Section 5 of [RFC6928], especially given the those discussed in Section 5 of [RFC6928], especially given the
target application discussed in Section 3.2. target application discussed in Section 3.2.
NON_TIMEOUT is used to compute the delay between sending NON_TIMEOUT is used to compute the delay between sending
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET for the same body. By default, NON_TIMEOUT has the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET for the same body. By default, NON_TIMEOUT has the
same value as ACK_TIMEOUT (Section 4.8 of [RFC7252]). same value as ACK_TIMEOUT (Section 4.8 of [RFC7252]).
NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM is the initial actual delay between sending the NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM is the initial actual delay between sending the
first two MAX_PAYLOADS_SETs of the same body. The same delay is then first two MAX_PAYLOADS_SETs of the same body. The same delay is then
used between the subsequent MAX_PAYLOADS_SETs. It is a random used between the subsequent MAX_PAYLOADS_SETs. It is a random
duration (not an integral number of seconds) between NON_TIMEOUT and duration (not an integral number of seconds) between NON_TIMEOUT and
(NON_TIMEOUT * ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR). ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR is set to 1.5 (NON_TIMEOUT * ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR). ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR is set to 1.5,
as discussed in Section 4.8 of [RFC7252]. as discussed in Section 4.8 of [RFC7252].
NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT is the initial time to wait for a missing payload NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT is the initial time to wait for a missing payload
before requesting retransmission for the first time. Every time the before requesting retransmission for the first time. Every time the
missing payload is re-requested, the time to wait value doubles. The missing payload is re-requested, the Time-to-Wait value doubles. The
time to wait is calculated as: time to wait is calculated as:
Time-to-Wait = NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT * (2 ** (Re-Request-Count - 1)) Time-to-Wait = NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT * (2 ** (Re-Request-Count - 1))
NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT has a default value of twice NON_TIMEOUT. NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT has a default value of twice NON_TIMEOUT.
NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT MUST always be greater than NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM by NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT MUST always be greater than NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM by
at least one second so that the sender of the payloads has the at least one second so that the sender of the payloads has the
opportunity to start sending the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET before the opportunity to start sending the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET before the
receiver times out. receiver times out.
NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT is the maximum number of times a request for the NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT is the maximum number of times a request for the
retransmission of missing payloads can occur without a response from retransmission of missing payloads can occur without a response from
the remote peer. After this occurs, the local endpoint SHOULD the remote peer. After this occurs, the local endpoint SHOULD
consider the body stale, remove any body, and release Tokens and consider the body stale, remove any body, and release the tokens and
Request-Tag on the client (or the ETag on the server). By default, Request-Tag on the client (or the ETag on the server). By default,
NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT has the same value as MAX_RETRANSMIT (Section 4.8 NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT has the same value as MAX_RETRANSMIT (Section 4.8
of [RFC7252]). of [RFC7252]).
NON_PROBING_WAIT is used to limit the potential wait needed when NON_PROBING_WAIT is used to limit the potential wait needed when
using PROBING_RATE. By default, NON_PROBING_WAIT is computed in a using PROBING_RATE. By default, NON_PROBING_WAIT is computed in a
similar way as EXCHANGE_LIFETIME (Section 4.8.2 of [RFC7252]) but way similar to EXCHANGE_LIFETIME (Section 4.8.2 of [RFC7252]) but
with ACK_TIMEOUT, MAX_RETRANSMIT, and PROCESSING_DELAY substituted with ACK_TIMEOUT, MAX_RETRANSMIT, and PROCESSING_DELAY substituted
with NON_TIMEOUT, NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, and NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM, with NON_TIMEOUT, NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, and NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM,
respectively: respectively:
NON_PROBING_WAIT = NON_TIMEOUT * ((2 ** NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT) - 1) * NON_PROBING_WAIT = NON_TIMEOUT * ((2 ** NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT) - 1) *
ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR + (2 * MAX_LATENCY) + NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR + (2 * MAX_LATENCY) + NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM
NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT is used for expiring partially received bodies. NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT is used for expiring partially received bodies.
By default, NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT is computed in the same way as By default, NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT is computed in the same way as
EXCHANGE_LIFETIME (Section 4.8.2 of [RFC7252]) but with ACK_TIMEOUT EXCHANGE_LIFETIME (Section 4.8.2 of [RFC7252]) but with ACK_TIMEOUT
and MAX_RETRANSMIT substituted with NON_TIMEOUT and and MAX_RETRANSMIT substituted with NON_TIMEOUT and
NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, respectively: NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, respectively:
NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT = NON_TIMEOUT * ((2 ** NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT) - NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT = NON_TIMEOUT * ((2 ** NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT) -
1) * ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR + (2 * MAX_LATENCY) + NON_TIMEOUT 1) * ACK_RANDOM_FACTOR + (2 * MAX_LATENCY) + NON_TIMEOUT
+---------------------+-------------------+
| Parameter Name | Default Value |
+=====================+===================+ +=====================+===================+
| MAX_PAYLOADS | 10 | | Parameter Name | Default Value |
| NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT | 4 | +=====================+===================+
| NON_TIMEOUT | 2 s | | MAX_PAYLOADS | 10 |
| NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM | between 2-3 s | +---------------------+-------------------+
| NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT | 4 s | | NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT | 4 |
+---------------------+-------------------+
| NON_TIMEOUT | 2 s |
+---------------------+-------------------+
| NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM | between 2-3 s |
+---------------------+-------------------+
| NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT | 4 s |
+---------------------+-------------------+
| NON_PROBING_WAIT | between 247-248 s | | NON_PROBING_WAIT | between 247-248 s |
| NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT | 247 s | +---------------------+-------------------+
| NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT | 247 s |
+---------------------+-------------------+ +---------------------+-------------------+
Table 3: Congestion Control Parameters Table 3: Congestion Control Parameters
The PROBING_RATE parameter in CoAP indicates the average data rate The PROBING_RATE parameter in CoAP indicates the average data rate
that must not be exceeded by a CoAP endpoint in sending to a peer that must not be exceeded by a CoAP endpoint in sending to a peer
endpoint that does not respond. A single body will be subjected to endpoint that does not respond. A single body will be subjected to
PROBING_RATE (Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]), not the individual packets. PROBING_RATE (Section 4.7 of [RFC7252]), not the individual packets.
If the wait time between sending bodies that are not being responded If the wait time between sending bodies that are not being responded
to based on PROBING_RATE exceeds NON_PROBING_WAIT, then the wait time to based on PROBING_RATE exceeds NON_PROBING_WAIT, then the wait time
is limited to NON_PROBING_WAIT. is limited to NON_PROBING_WAIT.
Note: For the particular DOTS application, PROBING_RATE and other | Note: For the particular DOTS application, PROBING_RATE and
transmission parameters are negotiated between peers. Even when | other transmission parameters are negotiated between peers.
not negotiated, the DOTS application uses customized defaults as | Even when not negotiated, the DOTS application uses customized
discussed in Section 4.5.2 of [RFC8782]. Note that MAX_PAYLOADS, | defaults, as discussed in Section 4.5.2 of [RFC9132]. Note
NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, NON_TIMEOUT, NON_PROBING_WAIT, and | that MAX_PAYLOADS, NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, NON_TIMEOUT,
NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT can be negotiated between DOTS peers, e.g., as | NON_PROBING_WAIT, and NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT can be negotiated
per [I-D.bosh-dots-quick-blocks]. When explicit values are | between DOTS peers, e.g., as per [DOTS-QUICK-BLOCKS]. When
configured for NON_PROBING_WAIT and NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT, these | explicit values are configured for NON_PROBING_WAIT and
values are used without applying any jitter. | NON_PARTIAL_TIMEOUT, these values are used without applying any
| jitter.
Each NON 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response is subject to Each NON 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response is subject to
PROBING_RATE. PROBING_RATE.
Each NON GET or FETCH request using a Q-Block2 Option is subject to Each NON GET or FETCH request using a Q-Block2 option is subject to
PROBING_RATE. PROBING_RATE.
As the sending of many payloads of a single body may itself cause As the sending of many payloads of a single body may itself cause
congestion, after transmission of every MAX_PAYLOADS_SET of a single congestion, after transmission of every MAX_PAYLOADS_SET of a single
body, a delay MUST be introduced of NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM before sending body, a delay of NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM MUST be introduced before sending
the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET unless a 'Continue' is received from the the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, unless a 'Continue' is received from the
peer for the current MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, in which case the next peer for the current MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, in which case the next
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET MAY start transmission immediately. MAX_PAYLOADS_SET MAY start transmission immediately.
Note: Assuming 1500-byte packets and the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET having Note: Assuming 1500-byte packets and the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET having
10 payloads, this corresponds to 1500 * 10 * 8 = 120 Kbits. With 10 payloads, this corresponds to 1500 * 10 * 8 = 120 kbits. With
a delay of 2 seconds between MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, this indicates an a delay of 2 seconds between MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, this indicates an
average speed requirement of 60 Kbps for a single body should average speed requirement of 60 kbps for a single body should
there be no responses. This transmission rate is further reduced there be no responses. This transmission rate is further reduced
by being subject to PROBING_RATE. by being subject to PROBING_RATE.
The sending of a set of missing blocks of a body is restricted to The sending of a set of missing blocks of a body is restricted to
those in a MAX_PAYLOADS_SET at a time. In other words, a those in a MAX_PAYLOADS_SET at a time. In other words, a
NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay is still observed between each NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay is still observed between each
MAX_PAYLOAD_SET. MAX_PAYLOADS_SET.
For Q-Block1 Option, if the server responds with a 2.31 (Continue) For the Q-Block1 option, if the server responds with a 2.31
Response Code for the latest payload sent, then the client can (Continue) response code for the latest payload sent, then the client
continue to send the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET without any further delay. can continue to send the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET without any further
If the server responds with a 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) delay. If the server responds with a 4.08 (Request Entity
Response Code, then the missing payloads SHOULD be retransmitted Incomplete) response code, then the missing payloads SHOULD be
before going into another NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay prior to sending retransmitted before going into another NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay
the next set of payloads. prior to sending the next set of payloads.
For the server receiving NON Q-Block1 requests, it SHOULD send back a For the server receiving NON Q-Block1 requests, it SHOULD send back a
2.31 (Continue) Response Code on receipt of all of the 2.31 (Continue) response code on receipt of all of the
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET to prevent the client unnecessarily delaying. If MAX_PAYLOADS_SET to prevent the client unnecessarily delaying the
not all of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET were received, the server SHOULD transfer of remaining blocks. If not all of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET
delay for NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (exponentially scaled based on the were received, the server SHOULD delay for NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT
repeat request count for a payload) before sending the 4.08 (Request (exponentially scaled based on the repeat request count for a
Entity Incomplete) Response Code for the missing payload(s). If all payload) before sending the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) response
of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET were received and a 2.31 (Continue) had been code for the missing payload(s). If all of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET were
sent, but no more payloads were received for NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT received and a 2.31 (Continue) response code had been sent, but no
(exponentially scaled), the server SHOULD send a 4.08 (Request Entity more payloads were received for NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (exponentially
Incomplete) response detailing the missing payloads after the block scaled), the server SHOULD send a 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete)
number that was indicated in the sent 2.31 (Continue). If the response detailing the missing payloads after the block number that
repeated response count of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) was indicated in the sent 2.31 (Continue) response code. If the
exceeds NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, the server SHOULD discard the partial repeat response count of the 4.08 (Request Entity Incomplete) exceeds
body and stop requesting the missing payloads. NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, the server SHOULD discard the partial body and
stop requesting the missing payloads.
It is likely that the client will start transmitting the next It is likely that the client will start transmitting the next
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET before the server times out on waiting for the last MAX_PAYLOADS_SET before the server times out on waiting for the last
of the previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. On receipt of a payload from the block of the previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. On receipt of a payload from
next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, the server SHOULD send a 4.08 (Request Entity the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, the server SHOULD send a 4.08 (Request
Incomplete) Response Code indicating any missing payloads from any Entity Incomplete) response code indicating any missing payloads from
previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. Upon receipt of the 4.08 (Request Entity any previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. Upon receipt of the 4.08 (Request
Incomplete) Response Code, the client SHOULD send the missing Entity Incomplete) response code, the client SHOULD send the missing
payloads before continuing to send the remainder of the payloads before continuing to send the remainder of the
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET and then go into another NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay MAX_PAYLOADS_SET and then go into another NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay
prior to sending the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. prior to sending the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET.
For the client receiving NON Q-Block2 responses, it SHOULD send a For the client receiving NON Q-Block2 responses, it SHOULD send a
'Continue' Q-Block2 request (Section 4.4) for the next 'Continue' Q-Block2 request (Section 4.4) for the next
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET on receipt of all of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, to MAX_PAYLOADS_SET on receipt of all of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET to prevent
prevent the server unnecessarily delaying. Otherwise the client the server unnecessarily delaying the transfer of remaining blocks.
SHOULD delay for NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (exponentially scaled based on Otherwise, the client SHOULD delay for NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT
the repeat request count for a payload), before sending the request (exponentially scaled based on the repeat request count for a
for the missing payload(s). If the repeat request count for a payload) before sending the request for the missing payload(s). If
missing payload exceeds NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, the client SHOULD discard the repeat request count for a missing payload exceeds
the partial body and stop requesting the missing payloads. NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT, the client SHOULD discard the partial body and
stop requesting the missing payloads.
The server SHOULD recognize the 'Continue' Q-Block2 request as a The server SHOULD recognize the 'Continue' Q-Block2 request per the
continue request and just continue the transmission of the body definition in Section 4.4 and just continue the transmission of the
(including Observe Option, if appropriate for an unsolicited body (including the Observe option, if appropriate for an unsolicited
response) rather than as a request for the remaining missing blocks. response) rather than treat 'Continue' as a request for the remaining
missing blocks.
It is likely that the server will start transmitting the next It is likely that the server will start transmitting the next
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET before the client times out on waiting for the last MAX_PAYLOADS_SET before the client times out on waiting for the last
of the previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. Upon receipt of a payload from the block of the previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. Upon receipt of a payload
new MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, the client SHOULD send a request indicating any from the new MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, the client SHOULD send a request
missing payloads from any previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. Upon receipt of indicating any missing payloads from any previous MAX_PAYLOADS_SET.
such request, the server SHOULD send the missing payloads before Upon receipt of such a request, the server SHOULD send the missing
continuing to send the remainder of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET and then go payloads before continuing to send the remainder of the
into another NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay prior to sending the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET and then go into another NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM delay
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET. prior to sending the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET.
The client does not need to acknowledge the receipt of the entire The client does not need to acknowledge the receipt of the entire
body. body.
Note: If there is asymmetric traffic loss causing responses to Note: If there is asymmetric traffic loss causing responses to
never get received, a delay of NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM after every never get received, a delay of NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM after every
transmission of MAX_PAYLOADS_SET will be observed. The endpoint transmission of MAX_PAYLOADS_SET will be observed. The endpoint
receiving the body is still likely to receive the entire body. receiving the body is still likely to receive the entire body.
8. Caching Considerations 8. Caching Considerations
Caching block based information is not straight forward in a proxy. Caching block-based information is not straightforward in a proxy.
For Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options, for simplicity it is expected that For the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options, for simplicity, it is expected
the proxy will reassemble the body (using any appropriate recovery that the proxy will reassemble the body (using any appropriate
options for packet loss) before passing on the body to the recovery options for packet loss) before passing the body onward to
appropriate CoAP endpoint. This does not preclude an implementation the appropriate CoAP endpoint. This does not preclude an
doing a more complex per payload caching, but how to do this is out implementation doing a more complex per-payload caching, but how to
of the scope of this document. The onward transmission of the body do this is out of the scope of this document. The onward
does not require the use of the Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 Options as these transmission of the body does not require the use of the Q-Block1 or
options may not be supported in that link. This means that the proxy Q-Block2 options, as these options may not be supported in that link.
must fully support the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options. This means that the proxy must fully support the Q-Block1 and
Q-Block2 options.
How the body is cached in the CoAP client (for Q-Block1 How the body is cached in the CoAP client (for Q-Block1
transmissions) or the CoAP server (for Q-Block2 transmissions) is transmissions) or the CoAP server (for Q-Block2 transmissions) is
implementation specific. implementation specific.
As the entire body is being cached in the proxy, the Q-Block1 and As the entire body is being cached in the proxy, the Q-Block1 and
Q-Block2 Options are removed as part of the block assembly and thus Q-Block2 options are removed as part of the block assembly and thus
do not reach the cache. do not reach the cache.
For Q-Block2 responses, the ETag Option value is associated with the For Q-Block2 responses, the ETag option value is associated with the
data (and onward transmitted to the CoAP client), but is not part of data (and transmitted onward to the CoAP client) but is not part of
the cache key. the cache key.
For requests with Q-Block1 Option, the Request-Tag Option is For requests with the Q-Block1 option, the Request-Tag option is
associated with the build up of the body from successive payloads, associated with building the body from successive payloads but is not
but is not part of the cache key. For the onward transmission of the part of the cache key. For the onward transmission of the body using
body using CoAP, a new Request-Tag SHOULD be generated and used. CoAP, a new Request-Tag SHOULD be generated and used. Ideally, this
Ideally this new Request-Tag should replace the client's request new Request-Tag should replace the Request-Tag used by the client.
Request-Tag.
It is possible that two or more CoAP clients are concurrently It is possible that two or more CoAP clients are concurrently
updating the same resource through a common proxy to the same CoAP updating the same resource through a common proxy to the same CoAP
server using Q-Block1 (or Block1) Option. If this is the case, the server using the Q-Block1 (or Block1) option. If this is the case,
first client to complete building the body causes that body to start the first client to complete building the body causes that body to
transmitting to the CoAP server with an appropriate Request-Tag start transmitting to the CoAP server with an appropriate Request-Tag
value. When the next client completes building the body, any value. When the next client completes building the body, any
existing partial body transmission to the CoAP server is terminated existing partial body transmission to the CoAP server is terminated,
and the new body representation transmission starts with a new and the transmission of the new body representation starts with a new
Request-Tag value. Note that it cannot be assumed that the proxy Request-Tag value. Note that it cannot be assumed that the proxy
will always receive a complete body from a client. will always receive a complete body from a client.
A proxy that supports Q-Block2 Option MUST be prepared to receive a A proxy that supports the Q-Block2 option MUST be prepared to receive
GET or similar request indicating one or more missing blocks. The a GET or similar request indicating one or more missing blocks. From
proxy will serve from its cache the missing blocks that are available its cache, the proxy will serve the missing blocks that are available
in its cache in the same way a server would send all the appropriate in its cache in the same way a server would send all the appropriate
Q-Block2 responses. If a body matching the cache key is not Q-Block2 responses. If a body matching the cache key is not
available in the cache, the proxy MUST request the entire body from available in the cache, the proxy MUST request the entire body from
the CoAP server using the information in the cache key. the CoAP server using the information in the cache key.
How long a CoAP endpoint (or proxy) keeps the body in its cache is How long a CoAP endpoint (or proxy) keeps the body in its cache is
implementation specific (e.g., it may be based on Max-Age). implementation specific (e.g., it may be based on Max-Age).
9. HTTP-Mapping Considerations 9. HTTP Mapping Considerations
As a reminder, the basic normative requirements on HTTP/CoAP mappings As a reminder, the basic normative requirements on HTTP/CoAP mappings
are defined in Section 10 of [RFC7252]. The implementation are defined in Section 10 of [RFC7252]. The implementation
guidelines for HTTP/CoAP mappings are elaborated in [RFC8075]. guidelines for HTTP/CoAP mappings are elaborated in [RFC8075].
The rules defined in Section 5 of [RFC7959] are to be followed. The rules defined in Section 5 of [RFC7959] are to be followed.
10. Examples with Non-confirmable Messages 10. Examples with Non-confirmable Messages
This section provides some sample flows to illustrate the use of This section provides some sample flows to illustrate the use of the
Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options with NON. Examples with CON are Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 options with NON. Examples with CON are
provided in Appendix A. provided in Appendix A.
The examples in the following subsections assume MAX_PAYLOADS is set The examples in the following subsections assume MAX_PAYLOADS is set
to 10 and NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT is set to 4. to 10 and NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT is set to 4.
Figure 2 lists the conventions that are used in the following The list below contains the conventions that are used in the figures
subsections. in the following subsections.
T: Token value T: Token value
O: Observe Option value
M: Message ID
RT: Request-Tag
ET: ETag
QB1: Q-Block1 Option values NUM/More/Size
QB2: Q-Block2 Option values NUM/More/Size
Size: Actual block size encoded in SZX
\: Trimming long lines
[[]]: Comments
-->X: Message loss (request)
X<--: Message loss (response)
...: Passage of time
Payload N: Corresponds to the CoAP message that conveys
a block number (N-1) of a given block-wise exchange.
Figure 2: Notations Used in the Figures O: Observe option value
M: Message ID
RT: Request-Tag
ET: ETag
QB1: Q-Block1 option values NUM/More/Size
QB2: Q-Block2 option values NUM/More/Size
Size: Actual block size encoded in SZX
\: Trimming long lines
[[]]: Comments
-->X: Message loss (request)
X<--: Message loss (response)
...: Passage of time
Payload N: Corresponds to the CoAP message that conveys a block
number (N-1) of a given block-wise exchange.
10.1. Q-Block1 Option 10.1. Q-Block1 Option
10.1.1. A Simple Example 10.1.1. A Simple Example
Figure 3 depicts an example of a NON PUT request conveying Q-Block1 Figure 2 depicts an example of a NON PUT request conveying the
Option. All the blocks are received by the server. Q-Block1 option. All the blocks are received by the server.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x81 T:0xc0 RT=9 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x81 T:0xc0 RT=9 QB1:0/1/1024
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x82 T:0xc1 RT=9 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x82 T:0xc1 RT=9 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x83 T:0xc2 RT=9 QB1:2/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x83 T:0xc2 RT=9 QB1:2/1/1024
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x84 T:0xc3 RT=9 QB1:3/0/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x84 T:0xc3 RT=9 QB1:3/0/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.04 M:0xf1 T:0xc3 |<---------+ NON 2.04 M:0xf1 T:0xc3
| ... | | ... |
Figure 3: Example of NON Request with Q-Block1 Option (Without Loss) Figure 2: Example of a NON Request with the Q-Block1 option
(without Loss)
10.1.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits 10.1.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits
Figure 4 depicts an example of a NON PUT request conveying Q-Block1 Figure 3 depicts an example of a NON PUT request conveying the
Option. The number of payloads exceeds MAX_PAYLOADS. All the blocks Q-Block1 option. The number of payloads exceeds MAX_PAYLOADS. All
are received by the server. the blocks are received by the server.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x01 T:0xf1 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x01 T:0xf1 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x02 T:0xf2 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x02 T:0xf2 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]] +--------->| [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]]
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x0a T:0xfa RT=10 QB1:9/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x0a T:0xfa RT=10 QB1:9/1/1024
[[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]] [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET receipt acknowledged by server]] | [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET receipt acknowledged by server]]
|<---------+ NON 2.31 M:0x81 T:0xfa |<---------+ NON 2.31 M:0x81 T:0xfa
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x0b T:0xfb RT=10 QB1:10/0/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x0b T:0xfb RT=10 QB1:10/0/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.04 M:0x82 T:0xfb |<---------+ NON 2.04 M:0x82 T:0xfb
| ... | | ... |
Figure 4: Example of MAX_PAYLOADS NON Request with Q-Block1 Option Figure 3: Example of a MAX_PAYLOADS NON Request with the Q-Block1
(Without Loss) Option (without Loss)
10.1.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery 10.1.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery
Consider now a scenario where a new body of data is to be sent by the Consider now a scenario where a new body of data is to be sent by the
client, but some blocks are dropped in transmission as illustrated in client, but some blocks are dropped in transmission, as illustrated
Figure 5. in Figure 4.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x11 T:0xe1 RT=11 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x11 T:0xe1 RT=11 QB1:0/1/1024
+--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x12 T:0xe2 RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024 +--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x12 T:0xe2 RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| [[Payloads 3 - 8 not detailed]] +--------->| [[Payloads 3 - 8 not detailed]]
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x19 T:0xe9 RT=11 QB1:8/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x19 T:0xe9 RT=11 QB1:8/1/1024
+--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x1a T:0xea RT=11 QB1:9/1/1024 +--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x1a T:0xea RT=11 QB1:9/1/1024
[[Some of MAX_PAYLOADS_SET have been received]] [[Some of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM (client) delay expires]] [[NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM (client) delay expires]]
| [[Client starts sending next MAX_PAYLOAD_SET]] | [[Client starts sending next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET]]
+--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x1b T:0xeb RT=11 QB1:10/1/1024 +--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x1b T:0xeb RT=11 QB1:10/1/1024
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1c T:0xec RT=11 QB1:11/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1c T:0xec RT=11 QB1:11/1/1024
| | | |
Figure 5: Example of MAX_PAYLOADS NON Request with Q-Block1 Option Figure 4: Example of a MAX_PAYLOADS NON Request with the Q-Block1
(With Loss) Option (with Loss)
On seeing a payload from the next MAX_PAYLOAD_SET, the server On seeing a payload from the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET, the server
realizes that some blocks are missing from the previous realizes that some blocks are missing from the previous
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET and asks for the missing blocks in one go MAX_PAYLOADS_SET and asks for the missing blocks in one go
(Figure 6). It does so by indicating which blocks from the previous (Figure 5). It does so by indicating which blocks from the previous
MAX_PAYLOADS_SET have not been received in the data portion of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET have not been received in the data portion of the
response (Section 5). The token used in the response should be the response (Section 5). The token used in the response should be the
token that was used in the last received payload. The client can token that was used in the last received payload. The client can
then derive the Request-Tag by matching the token with the sent then derive the Request-Tag by matching the token with the sent
request. request.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
|<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x91 T:0xec [Missing 1,9] |<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x91 T:0xec [Missing 1,9]
| [[Client responds with missing payloads]] | [[Client responds with missing payloads]]
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1d T:0xed RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1d T:0xed RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1e T:0xee RT=11 QB1:9/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1e T:0xee RT=11 QB1:9/1/1024
| [[Client continues sending next MAX_PAYLOAD_SET]] | [[Client continues sending next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET]]
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1f T:0xef RT=11 QB1:12/0/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x1f T:0xef RT=11 QB1:12/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]]
| [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks | [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks
| for the missing one]] | for the missing one]]
|<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x92 T:0xef [Missing 10] |<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x92 T:0xef [Missing 10]
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x20 T:0xf0 RT=11 QB1:10/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x20 T:0xf0 RT=11 QB1:10/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.04 M:0x93 T:0xf0 |<---------+ NON 2.04 M:0x93 T:0xf0
| ... | | ... |
Figure 6: Example of NON Request with Q-Block1 Option (Blocks Figure 5: Example of a NON Request with the Q-Block1 Option
Recovery) (Block Recovery)
10.1.4. Handling Recovery with Failure 10.1.4. Handling Recovery if Failure Occurs
Figure 7 depicts an example of a NON PUT request conveying Q-Block1 Figure 6 depicts an example of a NON PUT request conveying the
Option where recovery takes place, but eventually fails. Q-Block1 option where recovery takes place but eventually fails.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x91 T:0xd0 RT=12 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x91 T:0xd0 RT=12 QB1:0/1/1024
+--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x92 T:0xd1 RT=12 QB1:1/1/1024 +--->X | NON PUT /path M:0x92 T:0xd1 RT=12 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x93 T:0xd2 RT=12 QB1:2/0/1024 +--------->| NON PUT /path M:0x93 T:0xd2 RT=12 QB1:2/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]]
| [[The server realizes a block is missing and asks | [[The server realizes a block is missing and asks
| for the missing one. Retry #1]] | for the missing one. Retry #1]]
|<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x01 T:0xd2 [Missing 1] |<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x01 T:0xd2 [Missing 1]
| ... | | ... |
[[2 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]] [[2 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]]
| [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks | [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks
| for the missing one. Retry #2]] | for the missing one. Retry #2]]
|<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x02 T:0xd2 [Missing 1] |<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x02 T:0xd2 [Missing 1]
| ... | | ... |
[[4 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]] [[4 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]]
| [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks | [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks
| for the missing one. Retry #3]] | for the missing one. Retry #3]]
|<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x03 T:0xd2 [Missing 1] |<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x03 T:0xd2 [Missing 1]
| ... | | ... |
[[8 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]] [[8 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]]
| [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks | [[The server realizes a block is still missing and asks
| for the missing one. Retry #4]] | for the missing one. Retry #4]]
|<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x04 T:0xd2 [Missing 1] |<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0x04 T:0xd2 [Missing 1]
| ... | | ... |
[[16 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]] [[16 * NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]]
| [[NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT exceeded. Server stops requesting | [[NON_MAX_RETRANSMIT exceeded. Server stops requesting
| for missing blocks and releases partial body]] | the missing blocks and releases partial body]]
| ... | | ... |
Figure 7: Example of NON Request with Q-Block1 Option (With Eventual Figure 6: Example of a NON Request with the Q-Block1 Option (with
Failure) Eventual Failure)
10.2. Q-Block2 Option 10.2. Q-Block2 Option
These examples include the Observe Option to demonstrate how that These examples include the Observe option to demonstrate how that
option is used. Note that the Observe Option is not required for option is used. Note that the Observe option is not required for
Q-Block2; the observe detail can thus be ignored. Q-Block2.
10.2.1. A Simple Example 10.2.1. A Simple Example
Figure 8 illustrates the example of Q-Block2 Option. The client Figure 7 illustrates an example of the Q-Block2 option. The client
sends a NON GET carrying Observe and Q-Block2 Options. The Q-Block2 sends a NON GET carrying the Observe and Q-Block2 options. The
Option indicates a block size hint (1024 bytes). This request is Q-Block2 option indicates a block size hint (1024 bytes). The server
replied to by the server using four (4) blocks that are transmitted replies to this request using four (4) blocks that are transmitted to
to the client without any loss. Each of these blocks carries a the client without any loss. Each of these blocks carries a Q-Block2
Q-Block2 Option. The same process is repeated when an Observe is option. The same process is repeated when an Observe is triggered,
triggered, but no loss is experienced by any of the notification but no loss is experienced by any of the notification blocks.
blocks.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x01 T:0xc0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x01 T:0xc0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf1 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf1 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf2 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf2 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf3 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf3 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf4 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf4 T:0xc0 O:1220 ET=19 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf5 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf5 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf6 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf6 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf7 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf7 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf8 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xf8 T:0xc0 O:1221 ET=20 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
Figure 8: Example of NON Notifications with Q-Block2 Option (Without Figure 7: Example of NON Notifications with the Q-Block2 Option
Loss) (without Loss)
10.2.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits 10.2.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits
Figure 9 illustrates the same as Figure 8 but this time has eleven Figure 8 illustrates the same scenario as Figure 7, but this time
(11) payloads which exceeds MAX_PAYLOADS. There is no loss with eleven (11) payloads, which exceeds MAX_PAYLOADS. There is no
experienced. loss experienced.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x01 T:0xf0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x01 T:0xf0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x81 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x81 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x82 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x82 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]] |<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x8a T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:9/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x8a T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:9/1/1024
[[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]] [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using | [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using
| 'Continue' Q-Block2]] | 'Continue' Q-Block2]]
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x02 T:0xf1 QB2:10/1/1024 +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x02 T:0xf1 QB2:10/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x8b T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:10/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x8b T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:10/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x91 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x91 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x92 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x92 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]] |<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x9a T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:9/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x9a T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:9/1/1024
[[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]] [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using | [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using
| 'Continue' Q-Block2]] | 'Continue' Q-Block2]]
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x03 T:0xf2 QB2:10/1/1024 +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x03 T:0xf2 QB2:10/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x9b T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:10/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x9b T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:10/0/1024
[[Body has been received]] [[Body has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
Figure 9: Example of NON Notifications with Q-Block2 Option (Without Figure 8: Example of NON Notifications with the Q-Block2 Option
Loss) (without Loss)
10.2.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery 10.2.3. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS with Recovery
Figure 10 shows the example of an Observe that is triggered but for Figure 9 shows an example of an Observe that is triggered but for
which some notification blocks are lost. The client detects the which some notification blocks are lost. The client detects the
missing blocks and requests their retransmission. It does so by missing blocks and requests their retransmission. It does so by
indicating the blocks that are missing as one or more Q-Block2 indicating the blocks that are missing as one or more Q-Block2
Options. options.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa1 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa1 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:0/1/1024
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa2 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa2 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]] |<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]]
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xaa T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:9/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xaa T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:9/1/1024
[[Some of MAX_PAYLOADS_SET have been received]] [[Some of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM (server) delay expires]] [[NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM (server) delay expires]]
| [[Server sends next MAX_PAYLOAD_SET]] | [[Server sends next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xab T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:10/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xab T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:10/0/1024
| [[On seeing a payload from the next MAX_PAYLOAD_SET, | [[On seeing a payload from the next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET,
| Client realizes blocks are missing and asks for the | client realizes blocks are missing and asks for the
| missing ones in one go]] | missing ones in one go]]
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x04 T:0xf3 QB2:1/0/1024\ +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x04 T:0xf3 QB2:1/0/1024\
| | QB2:9/0/1024 | | QB2:9/0/1024
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xac T:0xf3 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xac T:0xf3 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xad T:0xf3 ET=23 QB2:9/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xad T:0xf3 ET=23 QB2:9/1/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]]
| [[Client realizes block is still missing and asks for | [[Client realizes block is still missing and asks for
| missing block]] | missing block]]
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x05 T:0xf4 QB2:1/0/1024 +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x05 T:0xf4 QB2:1/0/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xae T:0xf4 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xae T:0xf4 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
[[Body has been received]] [[Body has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
Figure 10: Example of NON Notifications with Q-Block2 Option (Blocks Figure 9: Example of NON Notifications with the Q-Block2 Option
Recovery) (Block Recovery)
10.2.4. Handling Recovery using M-bit Set 10.2.4. Handling Recovery by Setting the M Bit
Figure 11 shows the example of an Observe that is triggered but only Figure 10 shows an example where an Observe is triggered but only the
the first two notification blocks reach the client. In order to first two notification blocks reach the client. In order to retrieve
retrieve the missing blocks, the client sends a request with a single the missing blocks, the client sends a request with a single Q-Block2
Q-Block2 Option with the M bit set. option with the M bit set.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xb1 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xb1 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xb2 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xb2 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:1/1/1024
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xb3 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:2/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xb3 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:2/1/1024
| X<---+ [[Payloads 4 - 9 not detailed]] | X<---+ [[Payloads 4 - 9 not detailed]]
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xb9 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:9/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xb9 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:9/1/1024
[[Some of MAX_PAYLOADS_SET have been received]] [[Some of the MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM (server) delay expires]] [[NON_TIMEOUT_RANDOM (server) delay expires]]
| [[Server sends next MAX_PAYLOAD_SET]] | [[Server sends next MAX_PAYLOADS_SET]]
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xba T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:10/0/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xba T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:10/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]]
| [[Client realizes blocks are missing and asks for the | [[Client realizes blocks are missing and asks for the
| missing ones in one go by setting the M bit]] | missing ones in one go by setting the M bit]]
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x06 T:0xf5 QB2:2/1/1024 +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x06 T:0xf5 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xbb T:0xf5 ET=24 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xbb T:0xf5 ET=24 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]] |<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xc2 T:0xf5 ET=24 QB2:9/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xc2 T:0xf5 ET=24 QB2:9/1/1024
[[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]] [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using 'Continue' | [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using 'Continue'
| Q-Block2]] | Q-Block2]]
+--------->| NON GET /path M:0x87 T:0xf6 QB2:10/1/1024 +--------->| NON GET /path M:0x87 T:0xf6 QB2:10/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xc3 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:10/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xc3 T:0xf0 O:1237 ET=24 QB2:10/0/1024
[[Body has been received]] [[Body has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
Figure 11: Example of NON Notifications with Q-Block2 Option (Blocks Figure 10: Example of NON Notifications with the Q-Block2 Option
Recovery with M bit Set) (Block Recovery with the M Bit Set)
10.3. Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options 10.3. Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options
10.3.1. A Simple Example 10.3.1. A Simple Example
Figure 12 illustrates the example of a FETCH using both Q-Block1 and Figure 11 illustrates an example of a FETCH using both the Q-Block1
Q-Block2 Options along with an Observe Option. No loss is and Q-Block2 options along with an Observe option. No loss is
experienced. experienced.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x10 T:0x90 O:0 RT=30 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x10 T:0x90 O:0 RT=30 QB1:0/1/1024
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x11 T:0x91 O:0 RT=30 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x11 T:0x91 O:0 RT=30 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x12 T:0x93 O:0 RT=30 QB1:2/0/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x12 T:0x93 O:0 RT=30 QB1:2/0/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x60 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x60 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x61 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x61 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x62 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x62 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x63 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x63 T:0x93 O:1320 ET=90 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x64 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x64 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x65 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x65 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x66 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x66 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x67 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x67 T:0x93 O:1321 ET=91 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
Figure 12: Example of NON FETCH with Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Figure 11: Example of a NON FETCH with the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2
(Without Loss) Options (without Loss)
10.3.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits 10.3.2. Handling MAX_PAYLOADS Limits
Figure 13 illustrates the same as Figure 12 but this time has eleven Figure 12 illustrates the same scenario as Figure 11, but this time
(11) payloads in both directions which exceeds MAX_PAYLOADS. There with eleven (11) payloads in both directions, which exceeds
is no loss experienced. MAX_PAYLOADS. There is no loss experienced.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x30 T:0xa0 O:0 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x30 T:0xa0 O:0 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x31 T:0xa1 O:0 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x31 T:0xa1 O:0 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]] +--------->| [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]]
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x39 T:0xa9 O:0 RT=10 QB1:9/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x39 T:0xa9 O:0 RT=10 QB1:9/1/1024
[[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]] [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by server]] | [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by server]]
skipping to change at page 36, line 39 skipping to change at line 1606
|<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]] |<---------+ [[Payloads 3 - 9 not detailed]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x95 T:0xaa O:1335 ET=22 QB2:9/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x95 T:0xaa O:1335 ET=22 QB2:9/1/1024
[[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]] [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET has been received]]
| [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using | [[MAX_PAYLOADS_SET acknowledged by client using
| 'Continue' Q-Block2]] | 'Continue' Q-Block2]]
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x3c T:0xac QB2:10/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x3c T:0xac QB2:10/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x96 T:0xaa O:1335 ET=22 QB2:10/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0x96 T:0xaa O:1335 ET=22 QB2:10/0/1024
[[Body has been received]] [[Body has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
Figure 13: Example of NON FETCH with Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Figure 12: Example of a NON FETCH with the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2
(Without Loss) Options (without Loss)
Note that as 'Continue' was used, the server continues to use the Note that, as 'Continue' was used, the server continues to use the
same token (0xaa) since the 'Continue' is not being used as a request same token (0xaa), since the 'Continue' is not being used as a
for a new set of packets, but rather is being used to instruct the request for a new set of packets but rather is being used to instruct
server to continue its transmission (Section 7.2). the server to continue its transmission (Section 7.2).
10.3.3. Handling Recovery 10.3.3. Handling Recovery
Consider now a scenario where some blocks are lost in transmission as Consider now a scenario where some blocks are lost in transmission,
illustrated in Figure 14. as illustrated in Figure 13.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x50 T:0xc0 O:0 RT=31 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x50 T:0xc0 O:0 RT=31 QB1:0/1/1024
+--->X | NON FETCH /path M:0x51 T:0xc1 O:0 RT=31 QB1:1/1/1024 +--->X | NON FETCH /path M:0x51 T:0xc1 O:0 RT=31 QB1:1/1/1024
+--->X | NON FETCH /path M:0x52 T:0xc2 O:0 RT=31 QB1:2/1/1024 +--->X | NON FETCH /path M:0x52 T:0xc2 O:0 RT=31 QB1:2/1/1024
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x53 T:0xc3 O:0 RT=31 QB1:3/0/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x53 T:0xc3 O:0 RT=31 QB1:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (server) delay expires]]
Figure 14: Example of NON FETCH with Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Options Figure 13: Example of a NON FETCH with the Q-Block1 and Q-Block2
(With Loss) Options (with Loss)
The server realizes that some blocks are missing and asks for the The server realizes that some blocks are missing and asks for the
missing blocks in one go (Figure 15). It does so by indicating which missing blocks in one go (Figure 14). It does so by indicating which
blocks have not been received in the data portion of the response. blocks have not been received in the data portion of the response.
The token used in the response is the token that was used in the last The token used in the response is the token that was used in the last
received payload. The client can then derive the Request-Tag by received payload. The client can then derive the Request-Tag by
matching the token with the sent request. matching the token with the sent request.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
|<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0xa0 T:0xc3 [Missing 1,2] |<---------+ NON 4.08 M:0xa0 T:0xc3 [Missing 1,2]
| [[Client responds with missing payloads]] | [[Client responds with missing payloads]]
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x54 T:0xc4 O:0 RT=31 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x54 T:0xc4 O:0 RT=31 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x55 T:0xc5 O:0 RT=31 QB1:2/1/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x55 T:0xc5 O:0 RT=31 QB1:2/1/1024
| [[Server received FETCH body, | [[Server received FETCH body,
| starts transmitting response body]] | starts transmitting response body]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa1 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa1 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:0/1/1024
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa2 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa2 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa3 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa3 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa4 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:3/0/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa4 T:0xc3 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]]
| | | |
Figure 15: Example of NON Request with Q-Block1 Option (Server Figure 14: Example of a NON Request with the Q-Block1 Option
Recovery) (Server Recovery)
The client realizes that not all the payloads of the response have The client realizes that not all the payloads of the response have
been returned. The client then asks for the missing blocks in one go been returned. The client then asks for the missing blocks in one go
(Figure 16). Note that, following Section 2.7 of [RFC7959], the (Figure 15). Note that, following Section 2.7 of [RFC7959], the
FETCH request does not include the Q-Block1 or any payload. FETCH request does not include the Q-Block1 or any payload.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x56 T:0xc6 RT=31 QB2:1/0/1024\ +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x56 T:0xc6 RT=31 QB2:1/0/1024\
| | QB2:3/0/1024 | | QB2:3/0/1024
| [[Server receives FETCH request for missing payloads, | [[Server receives FETCH request for missing payloads,
| starts transmitting missing blocks]] | starts transmitting missing blocks]]
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa5 T:0xc6 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa5 T:0xc6 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa6 T:0xc6 ET=23 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa6 T:0xc6 ET=23 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]]
| [[Client realizes block is still missing and asks for | [[Client realizes block is still missing and asks for
| missing block]] | missing block]]
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x57 T:0xc7 RT=31 QB2:1/0/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x57 T:0xc7 RT=31 QB2:1/0/1024
| [[Server receives FETCH request for missing payload, | [[Server receives FETCH request for missing payload,
| starts transmitting missing block]] | starts transmitting missing block]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa7 T:0xc7 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa7 T:0xc7 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
[[Body has been received]] [[Body has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa8 T:0xc3 O:1337 ET=24 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa8 T:0xc3 O:1337 ET=24 QB2:0/1/1024
| X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa9 T:0xc3 O:1337 ET=24 QB2:1/1/1024 | X<---+ NON 2.05 M:0xa9 T:0xc3 O:1337 ET=24 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xaa T:0xc3 O:1337 ET=24 QB2:2/0/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xaa T:0xc3 O:1337 ET=24 QB2:2/0/1024
[[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]] [[NON_RECEIVE_TIMEOUT (client) delay expires]]
| [[Client realizes block is still missing and asks for | [[Client realizes block is still missing and asks for
| missing block]] | missing block]]
+--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x58 T:0xc8 RT=31 QB2:1/0/1024 +--------->| NON FETCH /path M:0x58 T:0xc8 RT=31 QB2:1/0/1024
| [[Server receives FETCH request for missing payload, | [[Server receives FETCH request for missing payload,
| starts transmitting missing block]] | starts transmitting missing block]]
|<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa7 T:0xc8 ET=24 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ NON 2.05 M:0xa7 T:0xc8 ET=24 QB2:1/1/1024
[[Body has been received]] [[Body has been received]]
| ... | | ... |
Figure 16: Example of NON Request with Q-Block1 Option (Client Figure 15: Example of a NON Request with the Q-Block1 Option
Recovery) (Client Recovery)
11. Security Considerations 11. Security Considerations
Security considerations discussed in Section 7 of [RFC7959] should be Security considerations discussed in Section 7 of [RFC7959] should be
taken into account. taken into account.
Security considerations discussed in Sections 11.3 and 11.4 of Security considerations discussed in Sections 11.3 and 11.4 of
[RFC7252] should be taken into account. [RFC7252] should also be taken into account.
OSCORE provides end-to-end protection of all information that is not OSCORE provides end-to-end protection of all information that is not
required for proxy operations and requires that a security context is required for proxy operations and requires that a security context is
set up (Section 3.1 of [RFC8613]). It can be trusted that the source set up (Section 3.1 of [RFC8613]). It can be trusted that the source
endpoint is legitimate even if NoSec security mode is used. However, endpoint is legitimate even if the NoSec mode is used. However, an
an intermediary node can modify the unprotected outer Q-Block1 and/or intermediary node can modify the unprotected Outer Q-Block1 and/or
Q-Block2 Options to cause a Q-Block transfer to fail or keep Q-Block2 options to cause a Q-Block transfer to fail or keep
requesting all the blocks by setting the M bit and, thus, causing requesting all the blocks by setting the M bit and thus causing
attack amplification. As discussed in Section 12.1 of [RFC8613], attack amplification. As discussed in Section 12.1 of [RFC8613],
applications need to consider that certain message fields and applications need to consider that certain message fields and message
messages types are not protected end-to-end and may be spoofed or types are not protected end to end and may be spoofed or manipulated.
manipulated. Therefore, it is NOT RECOMMENDED to use the NoSec Therefore, it is NOT RECOMMENDED to use the NoSec mode if either the
security mode if either the Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 Options is used. Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 option is used.
If OSCORE is not used, it is also NOT RECOMMENDED to use the NoSec If OSCORE is not used, it is also NOT RECOMMENDED to use the NoSec
security mode if either the Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 Options is used. mode if either the Q-Block1 or Q-Block2 option is used.
If NoSec is being used, Section D.5 of [RFC8613] discusses the If NoSec is being used, Appendix D.5 of [RFC8613] discusses the
security analysis and considerations for unprotected message fields security analysis and considerations for unprotected message fields
even if OSCORE is not being used. even if OSCORE is not being used.
Security considerations related to the use of Request-Tag are Security considerations related to the use of Request-Tag are
discussed in Section 5 of [I-D.ietf-core-echo-request-tag]. discussed in Section 5 of [RFC9175].
12. IANA Considerations 12. IANA Considerations
RFC Editor Note: Please replace [RFCXXXX] with the RFC number to be
assigned to this document.
12.1. CoAP Option Numbers Registry 12.1. CoAP Option Numbers Registry
IANA is requested to add the following entries to the "CoAP Option IANA has added the following entries to the "CoAP Option Numbers"
Numbers" sub-registry [Options] defined in [RFC7252] within the subregistry [IANA-Options] defined in [RFC7252] within the
"Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry: "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry:
+--------+------------------+-----------+ +========+==========+===========+
| Number | Name | Reference | | Number | Name | Reference |
+========+==================+===========+ +========+==========+===========+
| TBA1 | Q-Block1 | [RFCXXXX] | | 19 | Q-Block1 | RFC 9177 |
| TBA2 | Q-Block2 | [RFCXXXX] | +--------+----------+-----------+
+--------+------------------+-----------+ | 31 | Q-Block2 | RFC 9177 |
+--------+----------+-----------+
Table 4: CoAP Q-Block1 and Q-Block2 Option Numbers
This document suggests 19 (TBA1) and 31 (TBA2) as values to be Table 4: Additions to CoAP
assigned for the new option numbers. Option Numbers Registry
12.2. Media Type Registration 12.2. Media Type Registration
This document requests IANA to register the "application/missing- IANA has registered the "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" media
blocks+cbor-seq" media type in the "Media Types" registry type in the "Media Types" registry [IANA-MediaTypes]. This
[IANA-MediaTypes]. This registration follows the procedures registration follows the procedures specified in [RFC6838].
specified in [RFC6838]:
Type name: application Type name: application
Subtype name: missing-blocks+cbor-seq Subtype name: missing-blocks+cbor-seq
Required parameters: N/A Required parameters: N/A
Optional parameters: N/A Optional parameters: N/A
Encoding considerations: Must be encoded as a CBOR Encoding considerations: Must be encoded as a CBOR Sequence
sequence [RFC8742], as defined in Section 4 of [RFCXXXX]. [RFC8742], as defined in Section 5 of RFC 9177.
Security considerations: See Section 10 of [RFCXXXX]. Security considerations: See Section 11 of RFC 9177.
Interoperability considerations: N/A Interoperability considerations: N/A
Published specification: [RFCXXXX] Published specification: RFC 9177
Applications that use this media type: Data serialization and Applications that use this media type: Data serialization and
deserialization. In particular, the type is used by applications deserialization. In particular, the type is used by applications
relying upon block-wise transfers, allowing a server to specify relying upon block-wise transfers, allowing a server to specify
non-received blocks and request for their retransmission, as non-received blocks and request their retransmission, as defined
defined in Section 4 of [RFCXXXX]. in Section 4 of RFC 9177.
Fragment identifier considerations: N/A Fragment identifier considerations: N/A
Additional information: N/A Additional information: N/A
Person & email address to contact for further information: IETF, Person & email address to contact for further information: IETF,
iesg@ietf.org iesg@ietf.org
Intended usage: COMMON Intended usage: COMMON
Restrictions on usage: none Restrictions on usage: none
Author: See Authors' Addresses section. Author: See Authors' Addresses section of RFC 9177.
Change controller: IESG Change controller: IESG
Provisional registration? No Provisional registration? No
12.3. CoAP Content-Formats Registry 12.3. CoAP Content-Formats Registry
This document requests IANA to register the following CoAP Content- IANA has registered the following CoAP Content-Format for the
Format for the "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" media type in "application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq" media type in the "CoAP
the "CoAP Content-Formats" registry [Format], defined in [RFC7252], Content-Formats" registry [IANA-Format] defined in [RFC7252] within
within the "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters" the "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry:
registry:
o Media Type: application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq +=====================================+==========+=====+===========+
o Encoding: - | Media Type | Encoding | ID | Reference |
o Id: TBA3 +=====================================+==========+=====+===========+
o Reference: [RFCXXXX] | application/missing-blocks+cbor-seq | - | 272 | RFC 9177 |
+-------------------------------------+----------+-----+-----------+
This document suggests 272 (TBA3) as a value to be assigned for the Table 5: Addition to CoAP Content-Format Registry
new content format number.
13. References 13. References
13.1. Normative References 13.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-core-echo-request-tag]
Amsuess, C., Mattsson, J. P., and G. Selander, "CoAP:
Echo, Request-Tag, and Token Processing", draft-ietf-core-
echo-request-tag-12 (work in progress), February 2021.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC6838] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type [RFC6838] Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type
Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13, Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13,
RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013, RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>.
skipping to change at page 42, line 40 skipping to change at line 1881
[RFC8742] Bormann, C., "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) [RFC8742] Bormann, C., "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)
Sequences", RFC 8742, DOI 10.17487/RFC8742, February 2020, Sequences", RFC 8742, DOI 10.17487/RFC8742, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8742>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8742>.
[RFC8949] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object [RFC8949] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object
Representation (CBOR)", STD 94, RFC 8949, Representation (CBOR)", STD 94, RFC 8949,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8949, December 2020, DOI 10.17487/RFC8949, December 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8949>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8949>.
13.2. Informative References [RFC9175] Amsüss, C., Preuß Mattsson, J., and G. Selander,
"Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP): Echo, Request-
Tag, and Token Processing", RFC 9175,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9175, February 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9175>.
[Format] "CoAP Content-Formats", <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ 13.2. Informative References
core-parameters/core-parameters.xhtml#content-formats>.
[I-D.bosh-dots-quick-blocks] [DOTS-QUICK-BLOCKS]
Boucadair, M. and J. Shallow, "Distributed Denial-of- Boucadair, M. and J. Shallow, "Distributed Denial-of-
Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Signal Channel Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Signal Channel
Configuration Attributes for Faster Block Transmission", Configuration Attributes for Robust Block Transmission",
draft-bosh-dots-quick-blocks-01 (work in progress), Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-bosh-dots-quick-
January 2021. blocks-03, 29 June 2021,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-bosh-dots-
quick-blocks-03>.
[I-D.ietf-dots-telemetry] [DOTS-TELEMETRY]
Boucadair, M., Reddy, T., Doron, E., Chen, M., and J. Boucadair, M., Ed., Reddy.K, T., Ed., Doron, E., Chen, M.,
Shallow, "Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat and J. Shallow, "Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat
Signaling (DOTS) Telemetry", draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-15 Signaling (DOTS) Telemetry", Work in Progress, Internet-
(work in progress), December 2020. Draft, draft-ietf-dots-telemetry-19, 4 January 2022,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dots-
telemetry-19>.
[IANA-Format]
IANA, "CoAP Content-Formats",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters/>.
[IANA-MediaTypes] [IANA-MediaTypes]
IANA, "Media Types", IANA, "Media Types",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types>. <https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/>.
[Options] "CoAP Option Numbers", <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ [IANA-Options]
core-parameters/core-parameters.xhtml#option-numbers>. IANA, "CoAP Option Numbers",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters/>.
[RFC6928] Chu, J., Dukkipati, N., Cheng, Y., and M. Mathis, [RFC6928] Chu, J., Dukkipati, N., Cheng, Y., and M. Mathis,
"Increasing TCP's Initial Window", RFC 6928, "Increasing TCP's Initial Window", RFC 6928,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6928, April 2013, DOI 10.17487/RFC6928, April 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6928>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6928>.
[RFC7967] Bhattacharyya, A., Bandyopadhyay, S., Pal, A., and T. [RFC7967] Bhattacharyya, A., Bandyopadhyay, S., Pal, A., and T.
Bose, "Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) Option for Bose, "Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) Option for
No Server Response", RFC 7967, DOI 10.17487/RFC7967, No Server Response", RFC 7967, DOI 10.17487/RFC7967,
August 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7967>. August 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7967>.
[RFC8782] Reddy.K, T., Ed., Boucadair, M., Ed., Patil, P.,
Mortensen, A., and N. Teague, "Distributed Denial-of-
Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Signal Channel
Specification", RFC 8782, DOI 10.17487/RFC8782, May 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8782>.
[RFC8974] Hartke, K. and M. Richardson, "Extended Tokens and [RFC8974] Hartke, K. and M. Richardson, "Extended Tokens and
Stateless Clients in the Constrained Application Protocol Stateless Clients in the Constrained Application Protocol
(CoAP)", RFC 8974, DOI 10.17487/RFC8974, January 2021, (CoAP)", RFC 8974, DOI 10.17487/RFC8974, January 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8974>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8974>.
[RFC9132] Boucadair, M., Ed., Shallow, J., and T. Reddy.K,
"Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling
(DOTS) Signal Channel Specification", RFC 9132,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9132, September 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9132>.
Appendix A. Examples with Confirmable Messages Appendix A. Examples with Confirmable Messages
The following examples assume NSTART has been increased to 3. The following examples assume NSTART has been increased to 3.
The notations provided in Figure 2 are used in the following The conventions provided in Section 10 are used in the following
subsections. subsections.
A.1. Q-Block1 Option A.1. Q-Block1 Option
Let's now consider the use of Q-Block1 Option with a CON request as Let's now consider the use of the Q-Block1 option with a CON request,
shown in Figure 17. All the blocks are acknowledged (ACK). as shown in Figure 16. All the blocks are acknowledged (as noted
with "ACK").
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x01 T:0xf0 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x01 T:0xf0 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024
+--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x02 T:0xf1 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x02 T:0xf1 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x03 T:0xf2 RT=10 QB1:2/1/1024 +--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x03 T:0xf2 RT=10 QB1:2/1/1024
[[NSTART(3) limit reached]] [[NSTART(3) limit reached]]
|<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x01 |<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x01
+--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x04 T:0xf3 RT=10 QB1:3/0/1024 +--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x04 T:0xf3 RT=10 QB1:3/0/1024
|<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x02 |<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x02
|<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x03 |<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x03
|<---------+ ACK 2.04 M:0x04 |<---------+ ACK 2.04 M:0x04
| | | |
Figure 17: Example of CON Request with Q-Block1 Option (Without Loss) Figure 16: Example of a CON Request with the Q-Block1 Option
(without Loss)
Now, suppose that a new body of data is to be sent but with some Now, suppose that a new body of data is to be sent but with some
blocks dropped in transmission as illustrated in Figure 18. The blocks dropped in transmission, as illustrated in Figure 17. The
client will retry sending blocks for which no ACK was received. client will retry sending blocks for which no ACK was received.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x05 T:0xf4 RT=11 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x05 T:0xf4 RT=11 QB1:0/1/1024
+--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x06 T:0xf5 RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024 +--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x06 T:0xf5 RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024
+--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x07 T:0xf6 RT=11 QB1:2/1/1024 +--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x07 T:0xf6 RT=11 QB1:2/1/1024
[[NSTART(3) limit reached]] [[NSTART(3) limit reached]]
|<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x05 |<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x05
+--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x08 T:0xf7 RT=11 QB1:3/1/1024 +--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x08 T:0xf7 RT=11 QB1:3/1/1024
|<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x08 |<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x08
| ... | | ... |
[[ACK TIMEOUT (client) for M:0x06 delay expires]] [[ACK TIMEOUT (client) for M:0x06 delay expires]]
| [[Client retransmits packet]] | [[Client retransmits packet]]
+--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x06 T:0xf5 RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| CON PUT /path M:0x06 T:0xf5 RT=11 QB1:1/1/1024
[[ACK TIMEOUT (client) for M:0x07 delay expires]] [[ACK TIMEOUT (client) for M:0x07 delay expires]]
| [[Client retransmits packet]] | [[Client retransmits packet]]
+--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x07 T:0xf6 RT=11 QB1:2/1/1024 +--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x07 T:0xf6 RT=11 QB1:2/1/1024
|<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x06 |<---------+ ACK 0.00 M:0x06
| ... | | ... |
[[ACK TIMEOUT exponential backoff (client) delay expires]] [[ACK TIMEOUT exponential backoff (client) delay expires]]
| [[Client retransmits packet]] | [[Client retransmits packet]]
+--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x07 T:0xf6 RT=11 QB1:2/1/1024 +--->X | CON PUT /path M:0x07 T:0xf6 RT=11 QB1:2/1/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[Either body transmission failure (acknowledge retry timeout) [[Either body transmission failure (acknowledge retry timeout)
or successfully transmitted.]] or successfully transmitted]]
Figure 18: Example of CON Request with Q-Block1 Option (Blocks Figure 17: Example of a CON Request with the Q-Block1 Option
Recovery) (Block Recovery)
It is up to the implementation as to whether the application process It is up to the implementation as to whether the application process
stops trying to send this particular body of data on reaching stops trying to send this particular body of data on reaching
MAX_RETRANSMIT for any payload, or separately tries to initiate the MAX_RETRANSMIT for any payload or separately tries to initiate the
new transmission of the payloads that have not been acknowledged new transmission of the payloads that have not been acknowledged
under these adverse traffic conditions. under these adverse traffic conditions.
If there is likely to be the possibility of transient network losses, If transient network losses are possible, then the use of NON should
then the use of NON should be considered. be considered.
A.2. Q-Block2 Option A.2. Q-Block2 Option
An example of the use of Q-Block2 Option with Confirmable messages is An example of the use of the Q-Block2 option with Confirmable
shown in Figure 19. messages is shown in Figure 18.
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| CON GET /path M:0x01 T:0xf0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024 +--------->| CON GET /path M:0x01 T:0xf0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ ACK 2.05 M:0x01 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ ACK 2.05 M:0x01 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe1 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe1 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe2 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe2 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe3 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe3 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:3/0/1024
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe1 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe1
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe2 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe2
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe3 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe3
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe4 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe4 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe5 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe5 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe6 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe6 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:2/1/1024
[[NSTART(3) limit reached]] [[NSTART(3) limit reached]]
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe4 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe4
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe7 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe7 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:3/0/1024
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe5 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe5
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe6 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe6
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe7 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe7
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe8 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe8 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:0/1/1024
| X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xe9 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 | X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xe9 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
| X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xea T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024 | X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xea T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024
[[NSTART(3) limit reached]] [[NSTART(3) limit reached]]
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe8 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe8
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xeb T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xeb T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:3/0/1024
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xeb |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xeb
| ... | | ... |
[[ACK TIMEOUT (server) for M:0xe9 delay expires]] [[ACK TIMEOUT (server) for M:0xe9 delay expires]]
| [[Server retransmits packet]] | [[Server retransmits packet]]
|<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe9 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ CON 2.05 M:0xe9 T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:1/1/1024
[[ACK TIMEOUT (server) for M:0xea delay expires]] [[ACK TIMEOUT (server) for M:0xea delay expires]]
| [[Server retransmits packet]] | [[Server retransmits packet]]
| X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xea T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024 | X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xea T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024
|--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe9 |--------->+ ACK 0.00 M:0xe9
| ... | | ... |
[[ACK TIMEOUT exponential backoff (server) delay expires]] [[ACK TIMEOUT exponential backoff (server) delay expires]]
| [[Server retransmits packet]] | [[Server retransmits packet]]
| X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xea T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024 | X<---+ CON 2.05 M:0xea T:0xf0 O:1236 ET=23 QB2:2/1/1024
| ... | | ... |
[[Either body transmission failure (acknowledge retry timeout) [[Either body transmission failure (acknowledge retry timeout)
or successfully transmitted.]] or successfully transmitted]]
Figure 19: Example of CON Notifications with Q-Block2 Option Figure 18: Example of CON Notifications with the Q-Block2 Option
It is up to the implementation as to whether the application process It is up to the implementation as to whether the application process
stops trying to send this particular body of data on reaching stops trying to send this particular body of data on reaching
MAX_RETRANSMIT for any payload, or separately tries to initiate the MAX_RETRANSMIT for any payload or separately tries to initiate the
new transmission of the payloads that have not been acknowledged new transmission of the payloads that have not been acknowledged
under these adverse traffic conditions. under these adverse traffic conditions.
If there is likely to be the possibility of transient network losses, If transient network losses are possible, then the use of NON should
then the use of NON should be considered. be considered.
Appendix B. Examples with Reliable Transports Appendix B. Examples with Reliable Transports
The notations provided in Figure 2 are used in the following The conventions provided in Section 10 are used in the following
subsections. subsections.
B.1. Q-Block1 Option B.1. Q-Block1 Option
Let's now consider the use of Q-Block1 Option with a reliable Let's now consider the use of the Q-Block1 option with a reliable
transport as shown in Figure 20. There is no acknowledgment of transport, as shown in Figure 19. There is no acknowledgment of
packets at the CoAP layer, just the final result. packets at the CoAP layer, just the final result.
CoAP CoAP CoAP CoAP
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| PUT /path T:0xf0 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024 +--------->| PUT /path T:0xf0 RT=10 QB1:0/1/1024
+--------->| PUT /path T:0xf1 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024 +--------->| PUT /path T:0xf1 RT=10 QB1:1/1/1024
+--------->| PUT /path T:0xf2 RT=10 QB1:2/1/1024 +--------->| PUT /path T:0xf2 RT=10 QB1:2/1/1024
+--------->| PUT /path T:0xf3 RT=10 QB1:3/0/1024 +--------->| PUT /path T:0xf3 RT=10 QB1:3/0/1024
|<---------+ 2.04 |<---------+ 2.04
| | | |
Figure 20: Example of Reliable Request with Q-Block1 Option Figure 19: Example of a Reliable Request with the Q-Block1 Option
If there is likely to be the possibility of transient network losses, If transient network losses are possible, then the use of unreliable
then the use of unreliable transport with NON should be considered. transport with NON should be considered.
B.2. Q-Block2 Option B.2. Q-Block2 Option
An example of the use of Q-Block2 Option with a reliable transport is An example of the use of the Q-Block2 option with a reliable
shown in Figure 21. transport is shown in Figure 20.
Client Server Client Server
| | | |
+--------->| GET /path T:0xf0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024 +--------->| GET /path T:0xf0 O:0 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1234 ET=21 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
| [[Observe triggered]] | [[Observe triggered]]
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:0/1/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:0/1/1024
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:1/1/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:1/1/1024
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:2/1/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:2/1/1024
|<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:3/0/1024 |<---------+ 2.05 T:0xf0 O:1235 ET=22 QB2:3/0/1024
| ... | | ... |
Figure 21: Example of Notifications with Q-Block2 Option Figure 20: Example of Notifications with the Q-Block2 Option
If there is likely to be the possibility of network transient losses, If transient network losses are possible, then the use of unreliable
then the use of unreliable transport with NON should be considered. transport with NON should be considered.
Acknowledgements Acknowledgments
Thanks to Achim Kraus, Jim Schaad, and Michael Richardson for their Thanks to Achim Kraus, Jim Schaad, and Michael Richardson for their
comments. comments.
Special thanks to Christian Amsuess, Carsten Bormann, and Marco Special thanks to Christian Amsüss, Carsten Bormann, and Marco Tiloca
Tiloca for their suggestions and several reviews, which improved this for their suggestions and several reviews, which improved this
specification significantly. Thanks to Francesca Palombini for the specification significantly. Thanks to Francesca Palombini for the
AD review. AD review. Thanks to Pete Resnick for the Gen-ART review, Colin
Perkins for the TSVART review, and Emmanuel Baccelli for the IOT-DIR
Thanks to Pete Resnick for the Gen-ART review, Colin Perkins for the review. Thanks to Martin Duke, Éric Vyncke, Benjamin Kaduk, Roman
Tsvart review, and Emmanuel Baccelli for the Iotdir review. Thanks Danyliw, John Scudder, and Lars Eggert for the IESG review.
to Martin Duke, Eric Vyncke, Benjamin Kaduk, Roman Danyliw, John
Scudder, and Lars Eggert for the IESG review.
Some text from [RFC7959] is reused for readers convenience. Some text from [RFC7959] is reused for the readers' convenience.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Mohamed Boucadair Mohamed Boucadair
Orange Orange
Rennes 35000 35000 Rennes
France France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Jon Shallow Jon Shallow
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Email: supjps-ietf@jpshallow.com Email: supjps-ietf@jpshallow.com
 End of changes. 304 change blocks. 
1096 lines changed or deleted 1113 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/