draft-ietf-roll-indus-routing-reqs-03.txt   draft-ietf-roll-indus-routing-reqs-04.txt 
Networking Working Group K. Pister, Ed. Networking Working Group K. Pister, Ed.
Internet-Draft Dust Networks Internet-Draft Dust Networks
Intended status: Informational P. Thubert, Ed. Intended status: Informational P. Thubert, Ed.
Expires: June 21, 2009 Cisco Systems Expires: July 26, 2009 Cisco Systems
S. Dwars S. Dwars
Shell Shell
T. Phinney T. Phinney
December 18, 2008 January 22, 2009
Industrial Routing Requirements in Low Power and Lossy Networks Industrial Routing Requirements in Low Power and Lossy Networks
draft-ietf-roll-indus-routing-reqs-03 draft-ietf-roll-indus-routing-reqs-04
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 36 skipping to change at page 1, line 36
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 21, 2009. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 26, 2009.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2008 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2009 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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. to this document.
Abstract Abstract
skipping to change at page 3, line 12 skipping to change at page 3, line 12
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Applications and Traffic Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Applications and Traffic Patterns . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Network Topology of Industrial Applications . . . . . . . 9 2.2. Network Topology of Industrial Applications . . . . . . . 9
2.2.1. The Physical Topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.2.1. The Physical Topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.2. Logical Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.2.2. Logical Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3. Traffic Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3. Traffic Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.1. Service Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.1. Service Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.2. Configurable Application Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.2. Configurable Application Requirement . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.3. Different Routes for Different Flows . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.3. Different Routes for Different Flows . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4. Reliability Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4. Reliability Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5. Device-Aware Routing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 5. Device-Aware Routing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6. Broadcast/Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6. Broadcast/Multicast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7. Route Establishment Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 7. Route Establishment Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8. Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 8. Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9. Manageability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 9. Manageability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 10. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
13.3. External Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 13.3. External Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1. Terminology 1. Terminology
This document employes terminology defined in the ROLL terminology This document employes terminology defined in the ROLL terminology
document [I-D.ietf-roll-terminology]. This document also refers to document [I-D.ietf-roll-terminology]. This document also refers to
industrial standards: industrial standards:
HART: "Highway Addressable Remote Transducer", a group of HART: "Highway Addressable Remote Transducer", a group of
specifications for industrial process and control devices specifications for industrial process and control devices
administered by the HART Foundation (see [HART]). The latest version administered by the HART Foundation (see [HART]). The latest version
skipping to change at page 4, line 31 skipping to change at page 4, line 31
working on a standard for monitoring and non-critical process control working on a standard for monitoring and non-critical process control
applications. applications.
2. Introduction 2. Introduction
Wireless, low-power field devices enable industrial users to Wireless, low-power field devices enable industrial users to
significantly increase the amount of information collected and the significantly increase the amount of information collected and the
number of control points that can be remotely managed. The number of control points that can be remotely managed. The
deployment of these wireless devices will significantly improve the deployment of these wireless devices will significantly improve the
productivity and safety of the plants while increasing the efficiency productivity and safety of the plants while increasing the efficiency
of the plant workers. of the plant workers. IPv6 is perceived as a key technology to
provide the scalability and interoperability that are required in
that space and is being more and more present in standards and
products under development and early deployments.
Cable is perceived as a more proven, safer techhnology, and existing, Cable is perceived as a more proven, safer techhnology, and existing,
operational deployments are very stable in time. For these reasons, operational deployments are very stable in time. For these reasons,
it is not expected that wireless will replace wire in any foreseeable it is not expected that wireless will replace wire in any foreseeable
future; the consensus in the industrial space is rather that wireless future; the consensus in the industrial space is rather that wireless
will tremendously augment the scope and benefits of automation by will tremendously augment the scope and benefits of automation by
enabling the control of devices that were not connected in the past enabling the control of devices that were not connected in the past
for reasons of cost and/or deployment complexities. But for LLN to for reasons of cost and/or deployment complexities. But for LLN to
be adopted in the industrial environment, the wireless network needs be adopted in the industrial environment, the wireless network needs
to have three qualities: low power, high reliability, and easy to have three qualities: low power, high reliability, and easy
skipping to change at page 15, line 9 skipping to change at page 15, line 20
3.2. Configurable Application Requirement 3.2. Configurable Application Requirement
Time-varying user requirements for latency and bandwidth may require Time-varying user requirements for latency and bandwidth may require
changes in the provisioning of the underlying L2 protocols. A changes in the provisioning of the underlying L2 protocols. A
technician may initiate a query/response session or bulk transfer to technician may initiate a query/response session or bulk transfer to
diagnose or configure a field device. A level sensor device may need diagnose or configure a field device. A level sensor device may need
to perform a calibration and send a bulk file to a plant. The to perform a calibration and send a bulk file to a plant. The
routing protocol MUST route on paths that are changed to routing protocol MUST route on paths that are changed to
appropriately provision the application requirements. The routing appropriately provision the application requirements. The routing
protocol MUST support the ability to recompute paths based on protocol MUST support the ability to recompute paths based on Network
underlying link attributes/metric that may change dynamically. Layer abstractions of the underlying link attributes/metric that may
change dynamically.
3.3. Different Routes for Different Flows 3.3. Different Routes for Different Flows
Because different services categories have different service Because different services categories have different service
requirements, it is often desirable to have different routes for requirements, it is often desirable to have different routes for
different data flows between the same two endpoints. For example, different data flows between the same two endpoints. For example,
alarm or periodic data from A to Z may require path diversity with alarm or periodic data from A to Z may require path diversity with
specific latency and reliability. A file transfer between A and Z specific latency and reliability. A file transfer between A and Z
may not need path diversity. The routing algorithm MUST be able to may not need path diversity. The routing algorithm MUST be able to
generate different routes with different characteritics (e.g. generate different routes with different characteritics (e.g.
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
12 lines changed or deleted 16 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/