--- 1/draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-07.txt 2018-03-19 00:13:10.665928387 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-08.txt 2018-03-19 00:13:10.697929141 -0700 @@ -1,19 +1,19 @@ Distributed Mobility Management [dmm] C. Perkins Internet-Draft Futurewei Intended status: Standards Track V. Devarapalli -Expires: September 5, 2018 Vasona Networks - March 4, 2018 +Expires: September 19, 2018 Vasona Networks + March 18, 2018 MN Identifier Types for RFC 4283 Mobile Node Identifier Option - draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-07.txt + draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-08.txt Abstract Additional Identifier Type Numbers are defined for use with the Mobile Node Identifier Option for MIPv6 (RFC 4283). Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. @@ -21,21 +21,21 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on September 5, 2018. + This Internet-Draft will expire on September 19, 2018. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents @@ -56,35 +56,35 @@ 4.3. Description of the EUI-48 address type . . . . . . . . . 4 4.4. Description of the EUI-64 address type . . . . . . . . . 4 4.5. Description of the DUID type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Appendix A. RFID types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - A.1. Description of the RFID types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - A.1.1. Description of the RFID-SGTIN-64 type . . . . . . . . 11 - A.1.2. Description of the RFID-SGTIN-96 type . . . . . . . . 11 - A.1.3. Description of the RFID-SSCC-64 type . . . . . . . . 11 - A.1.4. Description of the RFID-SSCC-96 type . . . . . . . . 11 - A.1.5. Description of the RFID-SGLN-64 type . . . . . . . . 11 - A.1.6. Description of the RFID-SGLN-96 type . . . . . . . . 11 - A.1.7. Description of the RFID-GRAI-64 type . . . . . . . . 12 - A.1.8. Description of the RFID-GRAI-96 type . . . . . . . . 12 - A.1.9. Description of the RFID-GIAI-64 type . . . . . . . . 12 - A.1.10. Description of the RFID-GIAI-96 type . . . . . . . . 12 - A.1.11. Description of the RFID-DoD-64 type . . . . . . . . . 12 - A.1.12. Description of the RFID-DoD-96 type . . . . . . . . . 12 - A.1.13. Description of the RFID URI types . . . . . . . . . . 12 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + A.1. Description of the RFID types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + A.1.1. Description of the RFID-SGTIN-64 type . . . . . . . . 12 + A.1.2. Description of the RFID-SGTIN-96 type . . . . . . . . 12 + A.1.3. Description of the RFID-SSCC-64 type . . . . . . . . 12 + A.1.4. Description of the RFID-SSCC-96 type . . . . . . . . 12 + A.1.5. Description of the RFID-SGLN-64 type . . . . . . . . 12 + A.1.6. Description of the RFID-SGLN-96 type . . . . . . . . 12 + A.1.7. Description of the RFID-GRAI-64 type . . . . . . . . 13 + A.1.8. Description of the RFID-GRAI-96 type . . . . . . . . 13 + A.1.9. Description of the RFID-GIAI-64 type . . . . . . . . 13 + A.1.10. Description of the RFID-GIAI-96 type . . . . . . . . 13 + A.1.11. Description of the RFID-DoD-64 type . . . . . . . . . 13 + A.1.12. Description of the RFID-DoD-96 type . . . . . . . . . 13 + A.1.13. Description of the RFID URI types . . . . . . . . . . 13 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1. Introduction The Mobile Node Identifier Option for MIPv6 [RFC4283] has proved to be a popular design tool for providing identifiers for mobile nodes during authentication procedures with AAA protocols such as Diameter [RFC3588]. To date, only a single type of identifier has been specified, namely the MN NAI. Other types of identifiers are in common use, and even referenced in RFC 4283. In this document, we propose adding some basic types that are defined in various @@ -297,28 +297,106 @@ [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, DOI 10.17487/RFC3588, September 2003, . [RFID-DoD-spec] Department of Defense, "United States Department of Defense Suppliers Passive RFID Information Guide (Version 15.0)", January 2010. + [RFID-framework] + Institut National des Telecommunication, ""Heterogeneous + RFID framework design, analysis and evaluation"", July + 2012. + [ThreeGPP-IDS] 3rd Generation Partnership Project, "3GPP Technical Specification 23.003 V8.4.0: Technical Specification Group Core Network and Terminals; Numbering, addressing and identification (Release 8)", March 2009. + [TRACK-IoT] + IPv6.com, ""Heterogeneous IoT Network : TRACK-IoT"", March + 2012. + + [Using-RFID-IPv6] + IPv6.com, ""Using RFID & IPv6"", September 2006. + Appendix A. RFID types + The material in this non-normative appendix was originally composed + for inclusion in the main body of the specification, but was moved + into an appendix because there was insufficient support for + allocating RFID types at this time. It was observed that RFID-based + mobile devices may create privacy exposures unless confidentiality is + assured for signaling. A specification for eliminating unauthorized + RFID tracking based on layer-2 addresses would be helpful. + + Much of the following text is due to contributions from Hakima + Chaouchi. For an overview and some initial suggestions about using + RFID with IPv6 on mobile devices, see [Using-RFID-IPv6]. + + In the context of IoT and industry 4.0 vertical domain, efficient + inventory and tracking items is of major interest, and RFID + technology is the identification technology in the hardware design of + many such items. + + The "TRACKIOT: Heterogeneous IoT control" project ([TRACK-IoT], + [RFID-framework]) explored Mobile IPv6 as a mobility management + protocol for RFID-based mobile devices. + + 1. Passive RFID tags (that have no processing resources) need to be + handled by the gateway (likely also the RFID Reader), which is + then the end point of the mobility protocol. It is also the + point where the CoA will be created based on some combination + such as the RFID tag and the prefix of that gateway. The point + here is to offer the possibility to passive RFID items to get an + IPv6 address and take advantage of the mobility framework to + follow the mobile device (passive tag on the item). One example + scenario that has been proposed, showing the need for mobility + management of passive RFID items, would be pieces of art tagged + with passive tags that need to be monitored while transported. + 2. Using active RFID tags (where processing resource is available on + the tag), the end point of the mobility protocol can be pushed up + to the RFID Active tag. We name it also an identification + sensor. Use cases include active RFID tags for traceability of + cold food respect during mobility (transport) of food. Mobility + of cars equiped with active RFID tags that we already use for + toll payement can be added with mobility management. + + One major effort of connecting IETF efforts to the EPCGlobal (RFID + standardisation) led to the ONS (DNS version applied for RFID logical + names and page information retrieval). Attempts have tried to + connect IPv6 on the address space to RFID identifier format. Other + initiatives started working on gateways to map tag identifiers with + IPv6 addresses and build signaling protocols for the application + level. For instance tracking of mobile items equipped with a tag can + be triggered remotely by a remote correspondent node until a visiting + area where a mobile item equipped with an RFID tag is located. An + RFID reader will be added with an IPv6 to RFID tag translation. One + option is to build a Home IPv6 address of that tagged item by using + the prefix of the Home agent combined with the tag RFID identifier of + the mobile item; as the tag ID is unique, the home IPv6 address of + that item will be also unique. Then the visiting RFID reader will + compose the IPV6 care of address of the tagged mobile item by + combining the prefix of the RFID reader with the tag ID of the item). + + MIPv6 can then provide normally the mobility management of that RFID + tagged item. A different useful example of tagged items involves + items of a factory that can be tracked while they are transported, + especially for real time localisation and tracking of precious items + transported without GPS. An automotive car manufacturer can assign + IPv6 addresses corresponding to RFID tagged cars or mechanical car + parts, and build a tracking dataset of the mobility not only of the + cars, but also of the mechanical pieces. + The Tag Data standard promoted by Electronic Product Code(TM) (abbreviated EPC) [EPC-Tag-Data] supports several encoding systems or schemes, which are commonly used in RFID (radio-frequency identification) applications, including o RFID-GID (Global Identifier), o RFID-SGTIN (Serialized Global Trade Item Number), o RFID-SSCC (Serial Shipping Container), o RFID-SGLN (Global Location Number), o RFID-GRAI (Global Returnable Asset Identifier),