draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-18.txt   draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-19.txt 
ROLL P. Thubert, Ed. ROLL P. Thubert, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems Internet-Draft Cisco Systems
Updates: 6554 (if approved) R.A. Jadhav Updates: 6554 (if approved) R.A. Jadhav
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Tech Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Tech
Expires: 13 January 2022 M. Gillmore Expires: 28 January 2022 M. Gillmore
Itron Itron
12 July 2021 27 July 2021
Root initiated routing state in RPL Root initiated routing state in RPL
draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-18 draft-ietf-roll-dao-projection-19
Abstract Abstract
This document extends RFC 6550 and RFC 6553 to enable a RPL Root to This document extends RFC 6550 and RFC 6553 to enable a RPL Root to
install and maintain Projected Routes within its DODAG, along a install and maintain Projected Routes within its DODAG, along a
selected set of nodes that may or may not include self, for a chosen selected set of nodes that may or may not include self, for a chosen
duration. This potentially enables routes that are more optimized or duration. This potentially enables routes that are more optimized or
resilient than those obtained with the classical distributed resilient than those obtained with the classical distributed
operation of RPL, either in terms of the size of a Routing Header or operation of RPL, either in terms of the size of a Routing Header or
in terms of path length, which impacts both the latency and the in terms of path length, which impacts both the latency and the
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 13 January 2022. This Internet-Draft will expire on 28 January 2022.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2021 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
skipping to change at page 26, line 6 skipping to change at page 26, line 6
[RFC8025] to compress the RPL artifacts as indicated in [RFC8138]. [RFC8025] to compress the RPL artifacts as indicated in [RFC8138].
In that case, the source routed header is the exact copy of the In that case, the source routed header is the exact copy of the
(chain of) SRH-6LoRH found in the SR-VIO, also terminating by the (chain of) SRH-6LoRH found in the SR-VIO, also terminating by the
Track Egress. The RPI-6LoRH is appended next, followed by an IP- Track Egress. The RPI-6LoRH is appended next, followed by an IP-
in-IP 6LoRH Header that indicates the Ingress Router in the in-IP 6LoRH Header that indicates the Ingress Router in the
Encapsulator Address field, see as a similar case Figure 20 of Encapsulator Address field, see as a similar case Figure 20 of
[TURN-ON_RFC8138]. [TURN-ON_RFC8138].
In the case of a loose source-routed path, there MUST be either a In the case of a loose source-routed path, there MUST be either a
neighbor that is adjacent to the loose next hop, on which case the segment for the same Track to the loose next hop, on which case the
packet is forwarded to that neighbor, or another Track to the loose packet is forwarded to the next hop along that segment, a common
next hop for which this node is Ingress; in the latter case, another neighbor with the loose next hop, on which case the packet is
encapsulation takes place and the process possibly recurses; forwarded to that neighbor, or another Track to the loose next hop
for which this node or a neighbor is Ingress. In the latter case,
another encapsulation takes place and the process possibly recurses;
otherwise the packet is dropped. otherwise the packet is dropped.
In case of a forwarding error along a Source Route path, the node In case of a forwarding error along a Source Route path, the node
that fails to forward SHOULD send an ICMP error with a code "Error in that fails to forward SHOULD send an ICMP error with a code "Error in
Source Routing Header" back to the source of the packet, as described Source Routing Header" back to the source of the packet, as described
in section 11.2.2.3. of [RPL]. Upon this message, the encapsulating in section 11.2.2.3. of [RPL]. Upon this message, the encapsulating
node SHOULD stop using the source route path for a period of time and node SHOULD stop using the source route path for a period of time and
it SHOULD send an ICMP message with a Code "Error in Projected Route" it SHOULD send an ICMP message with a Code "Error in Projected Route"
to the Root. Failure to follow these steps may result in packet loss to the Root. Failure to follow these steps may result in packet loss
and wasted resources along the source route path that is broken. and wasted resources along the source route path that is broken.
skipping to change at page 48, line 28 skipping to change at page 48, line 28
(RPLs)", RFC 7416, DOI 10.17487/RFC7416, January 2015, (RPLs)", RFC 7416, DOI 10.17487/RFC7416, January 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7416>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7416>.
[6TiSCH-ARCHI] [6TiSCH-ARCHI]
Thubert, P., Ed., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the Time- Thubert, P., Ed., "An Architecture for IPv6 over the Time-
Slotted Channel Hopping Mode of IEEE 802.15.4 (6TiSCH)", Slotted Channel Hopping Mode of IEEE 802.15.4 (6TiSCH)",
RFC 9030, DOI 10.17487/RFC9030, May 2021, RFC 9030, DOI 10.17487/RFC9030, May 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9030>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9030>.
[RAW-ARCHI] [RAW-ARCHI]
Thubert, P., Papadopoulos, G. Z., and R. Buddenberg, Thubert, P., Papadopoulos, G. Z., and L. Berger, "Reliable
"Reliable and Available Wireless Architecture/Framework", and Available Wireless Architecture/Framework", Work in
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-pthubert-raw- Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-raw-architecture-00,
architecture-05, 15 November 2020, 12 July 2021, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-pthubert-raw- draft-ietf-raw-architecture-00>.
architecture-05>.
[TURN-ON_RFC8138] [TURN-ON_RFC8138]
Thubert, P., Ed. and L. Zhao, "A Routing Protocol for Low- Thubert, P., Ed. and L. Zhao, "A Routing Protocol for Low-
Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) Destination-Oriented Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) Destination-Oriented
Directed Acyclic Graph (DODAG) Configuration Option for Directed Acyclic Graph (DODAG) Configuration Option for
the 6LoWPAN Routing Header", RFC 9035, the 6LoWPAN Routing Header", RFC 9035,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9035, April 2021, DOI 10.17487/RFC9035, April 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9035>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9035>.
[RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas, [RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
 End of changes. 6 change blocks. 
14 lines changed or deleted 15 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/