Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases
draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases
6Lo Working Group Y-G. Hong
Internet-Draft Daejeon University
Intended status: Informational C.G. Gomez
Expires: 7 October 2023 UPC
Y-H. Choi
ETRI
AR. Sangi
Wenzhou-Kean University
S. Chakrabarti
5 April 2023
IPv6 over Constrained Node Networks (6lo) Applicability & Use cases
draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-16
Abstract
This document describes the applicability of IPv6 over constrained
node networks (6lo) and provides practical deployment examples. In
addition to IEEE Std 802.15.4, various link layer technologies such
as ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), Bluetooth Low Energy (Bluetooth LE),
Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications-Ultra Low Energy (DECT-
ULE), Master-Slave/Token Passing (MS/TP), Near Field Communication
(NFC), and Power Line Communication (PLC) are used as examples. The
document targets an audience who would like to understand and
evaluate running end-to-end IPv6 over the constrained node networks
for local or Internet connectivity.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
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
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 7 October 2023.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 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 carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. 6lo Link layer technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. ITU-T G.9959 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Bluetooth LE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. DECT-ULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. MS/TP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.5. NFC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.6. PLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.7. Comparison between 6lo link layer technologies . . . . . 8
3. Guidelines for adopting an IPv6 stack (6lo) . . . . . . . . . 9
4. 6lo Deployment Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1. Wi-SUN usage of 6lo in network layer . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.2. Thread usage of 6lo in network layer . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.3. G3-PLC usage of 6lo in network layer . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.4. Netricity usage of 6lo in network layer . . . . . . . . . 14
5. 6lo Use Case Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.1. Use case of ITU-T G.9959: Smart Home . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2. Use case of Bluetooth LE: Smartphone-based Interaction . 16
5.3. Use case of DECT-ULE: Smart Home . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5.4. Use case of MS/TP: Building Automation Networks . . . . . 17
5.5. Use case of NFC: Alternative Secure Transfer . . . . . . 18
5.6. Use case of PLC: Smart Grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Appendix A. Design Space Dimensions for 6lo Deployment . . . . . 27
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
1. Introduction
Running IPv6 on constrained node networks presents challenges, due to
the characteristics of these networks such as small packet size, low
power, low bandwidth, and large number of devices, among others
[RFC4919][RFC7228]. For example, many IEEE Std 802.15.4 variants
[IEEE802154] exhibit a frame size of 127 octets, whereas IPv6
requires its underlying layer to support an MTU of 1280 bytes.
Furthermore, those IEEE Std 802.15.4 variants do not offer
fragmentation and reassembly functionality. (It is noted that IEEE
Std 802.15.9-2021 provides a multiplexing and fragmentation layer for
the IEEE Std 802.15.4 [IEEE802159].) Therefore, an appropriate
adaptation layer supporting fragmentation and reassembly must be
provided below IPv6. Also, the limited IEEE Std 802.15.4 frame size
and low energy consumption requirements motivate the need for packet
header compression. The IETF IPv6 over Low-Power WPAN (6LoWPAN)
working group published a suite of specifications that provide an
adaptation layer to support IPv6 over IEEE Std 802.15.4 comprising
the following functionality:
* Fragmentation and reassembly, address autoconfiguration, and a
frame format [RFC4944],
* IPv6 (and UDP) header compression [RFC6282],
* Neighbor Discovery Optimization for 6LoWPAN [RFC6775][RFC8505].
As Internet of Things (IoT) services become more popular, the IETF
has defined adaptation layer functionality to support IPv6 over
various link layer technologies other than IEEE Std 802.15.4, such as
Bluetooth Low Energy (Bluetooth LE), ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), Digital
Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications - Ultra Low Energy (DECT-ULE),
Master-Slave/Token Passing (MS/TP), Near Field Communication (NFC),
and Power Line Communication (PLC). The 6lo adaptation layers use a
variation of the 6LoWPAN stack applied to each particular link layer
technology.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
The 6LoWPAN working group produced the document entitled "Design and
Application Spaces for 6LoWPANs" [RFC6568], which describes potential
application scenarios and use cases for low-power wireless personal
area networks. The present document aims to provide guidance to an
audience who are new to the IPv6 over constrained node networks (6lo)
concept and want to assess its application to the constrained node
network of their interest. This 6lo applicability document describes
a few sets of practical 6lo deployment scenarios and use cases
examples. In addition, it considers various network design space
dimensions such as deployment, network size, power source,
connectivity, multi-hop communication, traffic pattern, security
level, mobility, and QoS requirements (see Appendix A).
This document provides the applicability and use cases of 6lo,
considering the following aspects:
* It covers various IoT-related wired/wireless link layer
technologies providing practical information about such
technologies.
* It provides a general guideline on how the 6LoWPAN stack can be
modified for a given L2 technology.
* Various 6lo use cases and practical deployment examples are
described.
2. 6lo Link layer technologies
2.1. ITU-T G.9959
The ITU-T G.9959 Recommendation [G.9959] targets low-power Wireless
Personal Area Networks (WPANs), and defines physical layer and link
layer functionality. Physical layers of 9.6 kbit/s, 40 kbit/s and
100 kbit/s are supported. G.9959 defines how a unique 32-bit HomeID
network identifier is assigned by a network controller and how an
8-bit NodeID host identifier is allocated to each node. NodeIDs are
unique within the network identified by the HomeID. The G.9959
HomeID represents an IPv6 subnet that is identified by one or more
IPv6 prefixes [RFC7428]. ITU-T G.9959 can be used for smart home
applications and the transmisstion rage is 100 meters per hop.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
2.2. Bluetooth LE
Bluetooth LE was introduced in Bluetooth 4.0, enhanced in Bluetooth
4.1, and developed further in successive versions. The data rate of
Bluetooth LE is 125 kb/s, 500 kb/s, 1 Mb/s, 2 Mb/s and max
transmission range is around 100 meters (outdoors). The Bluetooth
SIG has also published the Internet Protocol Support Profile (IPSP).
The IPSP enables discovery of IP-enabled devices and establishment of
link-layer connections for transporting IPv6 packets. IPv6 over
Bluetooth LE is dependent on both Bluetooth 4.1 and IPSP 1.0 or newer
[BTCorev4.1][IPSP].
Many devices such as mobile phones, notebooks, tablets and other
handheld computing devices which support Bluetooth 4.0 or subsequent
versions also support the low-energy variant of Bluetooth. Bluetooth
LE is also being included in many different types of accessories that
collaborate with mobile devices. An example of a use case for a
Bluetooth LE accessory is a heart rate monitor that sends data via
the mobile phone to a server on the Internet [RFC7668]. A typical
usage of Bluetooth LE is smartphone-based interaction with
constrained devices. Bluetooth LE was originally designed to enable
star topology networks. However, recent Bluetooth versions support
the formation of extended topologies, and IPv6 support for mesh
networks of Bluetooth LE devices has been developed [RFC9159].
2.3. DECT-ULE
DECT-ULE is a low-power air interface technology that is designed to
support both circuit-switched services, such as voice communication,
and packet-mode data services at modest data rate
[TS102.939-1][TS102.939-2].
The DECT-ULE protocol stack consists of the physical layer operating
at frequencies in the dedicated 1880 - 1920 MHz frequency band
depending on the region and uses a symbol rate of 1.152 Mbps. Radio
bearers are allocated by use of FDMA/TDMA/TDD techniques. The
coverage distance is from 70 meters (indoors) to 600 meters
(outdoors).
In its generic network topology, DECT is defined as a cellular
network technology. However, the most common configuration is a star
network with a single Fixed Part (FP) defining the network with a
number of Portable Parts (PP) attached. The Medium Access Control
(MAC) layer supports classical DECT as this is used for services like
discovery, pairing, and security features. All these features have
been reused from DECT.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
The DECT-ULE device can switch to the ULE mode of operation,
utilizing the new ULE MAC layer features. The DECT-ULE Data Link
Control (DLC) provides multiplexing as well as segmentation and re-
assembly for larger packets from layers above. The DECT-ULE layer
also implements per-message authentication and encryption. The DLC
layer ensures packet integrity and preserves packet order, but
delivery is based on best effort.
The current DECT-ULE MAC layer standard supports low bandwidth data
broadcast. However, the usage of this broadcast service has not yet
been standardized for higher layers [RFC8105]. DECT-ULE can be used
for smart metering in a home.
2.4. MS/TP
MS/TP is a MAC protocol for the RS-485 [TIA-485-A] physical layer and
is used primarily in building automation networks.
An MS/TP device is typically based on a low-cost microcontroller with
limited processing power and memory. These constraints, together
with low data rates and a small MAC address space, are similar to
those faced in 6LoWPAN networks. MS/TP differs significantly from
6LoWPAN in at least three respects: a) MS/TP devices are typically
mains powered, b) all MS/TP devices on a segment can communicate
directly so there are no hidden node or mesh routing issues, and c)
the latest MS/TP specification provides support for large payloads,
eliminating the need for fragmentation and reassembly below IPv6.
MS/TP is designed to enable multidrop networks over shielded twisted
pair wiring. It can support network segments up to 1000 meters in
length at a data rate of 115.2 kbit/s or segments up to 1200 meters
in length at lower bit rates. An MS/TP interface requires only a
Universal Asynchronous Receiver-Transmitter (UART), an RS-485
[TIA-485-A] transceiver with a driver that can be disabled, and a 5
ms resolution timer. The MS/TP MAC is typically implemented in
software.
Because of its long-range (~1 km), MS/TP can be used to connect
remote devices (such as district heating controllers) to the nearest
building control infrastructure over a single link [RFC8163].
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
2.5. NFC
NFC technology enables secure interactions between electronic
devices, allowing consumers to perform contactless transactions,
access digital content, and connect electronic devices with a single
touch [LLCP-1.4]. The distance between sender and receiver is 10 cm
or less. NFC complements many popular consumer-level wireless
technologies, by utilizing the key elements in existing standards for
contactless card technology (ISO/IEC 14443 A&B and JIS-X 6319-4).
Extending the capability of contactless card technology, NFC also
enables devices to share information at a distance that is less than
10 cm with a maximum communication speed of 424 kbps. Users can
share business cards, make transactions, access information from a
smart poster or provide credentials for access control systems with a
simple touch.
NFC's bidirectional communication ability is suitable for
establishing connections with other technologies by the simplicity of
touch. In addition to the easy connection and quick transactions,
simple data sharing is available [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc]. NFC can be used
for secure transfer services where privacy is important.
2.6. PLC
PLC is a data transmission technique that utilizes power conductors
as medium [RFC9354]. Unlike other dedicated communication
infrastructure, power conductors are widely available indoors and
outdoors. Moreover, wired technologies cause less interference to
the radio medium than wireless technologies and are more reliable
than their wireless counterparts.
The table below shows some available open standards defining PLC.
+=============+=================+============+===========+==========+
| PLC Systems | Frequency Range | Type | Data | Distance |
| | | | Rate | |
+=============+=================+============+===========+==========+
| IEEE 1901 | <100MHz | Broadband | 200Mbps | 1000m |
+-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+
| IEEE 1901.1 | <12MHz | PLC-IoT | 10Mbps | 2000m |
+-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+
| IEEE 1901.2 | <500kHz | Narrowband | 200kbps | 3000m |
+-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+
| G3-PLC | <500kHz | Narrowband | 234kbps | 3000m |
+-------------+-----------------+------------+-----------+----------+
Table 1: Some Available Open Standards in PLC
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
IEEE Std 1901 [IEEE1901] defines a broadband variant of PLC but it is
only effective within short range. This standard addresses the
requirements of high data rates such as Internet, HDTV, audio,
gaming.
IEEE Std 1901.1 [IEEE1901.1] defines a medium frequency band (less
than 12 MHz) broadband PLC technology for smart grid applications
based on OFDM(Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing). By
achieving an extended communication range with medium speeds, this
standard can be applied both in indoor and outdoor scenarios, such as
Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), street lighting, electric
vehicle charging, smart city.
IEEE Std 1901.2 [IEEE1901.2] defines a narrowband variant of PLC with
lower data rate but significantly higher transmission range that
could be used in an indoor or even an outdoor environment. A typical
use case of PLC is smart grid.
G3-PLC [G3-PLC] is a narrowband PLC technology that is based on the
ITU-T G.9903 Recommendation [G.9903]. The ITU-T G.9903
Recommendation contains the physical layer and data link layer
specification for the G3-PLC narrowband OFDM power line communication
transceivers, for communications via alternating current and direct
current electric power lines over frequency bands below 500 kHz.
2.7. Comparison between 6lo link layer technologies
In the above subsections, various 6lo link layer technologies are
described. The following table shows the dominant parameters of each
use case corresponding to the 6lo link layer technology.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | Z-Wave |Bluetooth| DECT-ULE| MS/TP | NFC | PLC |
| | | LE | | | | |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | Home | Interact| Meter | Building| Secure | Smart |
| Usage | Auto- | w/ Smart| Reading | Auto- | Transfer| Grid |
| | mation | Phone | | mation | | |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Topology | L2-mesh | Star | Star | MS/TP | P2P | Star |
| & | or | & | No mesh | No mesh | L2-mesh | Tree |
| Subnet | L3-mesh | Mesh | | | | Mesh |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Mobility | | | | | | |
| Requirement | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | No |
| | | | | | | |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Buffering | | | | | | |
| Requirement | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| | | | | | | |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Latency, | | | | | | |
| QoS | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Requirement | | | | | | |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Frequent | | | | | | |
| Transmission | No | No | No | Yes | No | No |
| Requirement | | | | | | |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| RFC # | | RFC7668 | | | draft- | |
| or | RFC7428 | RFC9159 | RFC8105 | RFC8163 | ietf-6lo| RFC9354 |
| Draft | | | | | -nfc | |
+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
Table 2: Comparison between 6lo link layer technologies
3. Guidelines for adopting an IPv6 stack (6lo)
6lo aims at reusing and/or adapting existing 6LoWPAN functionality in
order to efficiently support IPv6 over a variety of IoT L2
technologies. The following guideline targets new candidate
constrained L2 technologies that may be considered for running a
modified 6LoWPAN stack on top. The modification of the 6LoWPAN stack
should be based on the following:
* Addressing Model: The addressing model determines whether the
device is capable of forming IPv6 link-local and global addresses,
and what is the best way to derive the IPv6 addresses for the
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
constrained L2 devices. L2-address-derived IPv6 addresses are
specified in [RFC4944], but there exist implications for privacy.
The reason is that the L2-address in 6lo link layer technologies
is a little short and devices can become vulnerable to the various
threats. For global usage, a unique IPv6 address must be derived
using an assigned prefix and a unique interface ID. [RFC8065]
provides such guidelines. For MAC-derived IPv6 addresses, please
refer to [RFC8163] for IPv6 address mapping examples. Broadcast
and multicast support are dependent on the L2 networks. Most low-
power L2 implementations map multicast to broadcast networks. So
care must be taken in the design for when to use broadcast, trying
to stick to unicast messaging whenever possible.
* MTU Considerations: The deployment should consider packet maximum
transmission unit (MTU) needs over the link layer and should
consider if fragmentation and reassembly of packets are needed at
the 6LoWPAN layer. For example, if the link layer supports
fragmentation and reassembly of packets, then the 6LoWPAN layer
may not need to support fragmentation/reassembly. In fact, for
greatest efficiency, choosing a low-power link layer that can
carry unfragmented application packets would be optimal for packet
transmission if the deployment can afford it. Please refer to 6lo
RFCs [RFC7668], [RFC8163], and [RFC8105] for example guidance.
* Mesh or L3-Routing: 6LoWPAN specifications provide mechanisms to
support mesh routing at L2, a configuration called mesh-under
[RFC6606]. It is also possible to use an L3 routing protocol in
6LoWPAN, an approach known as route-over. [RFC6550] defines RPL,
a L3 routing protocol for low power and lossy networks using
directed acyclic graphs. 6LoWPAN is routing-protocol-agnostic and
does not specify any particular L2 or L3 routing protocol to use
with a 6LoWPAN stack.
* Address Assignment: 6LoWPAN developed a new version of IPv6
Neighbor Discovery [RFC4861][RFC4862]. 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery
[RFC6775][RFC8505] inherits from IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for
mechanisms such as Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) and
Neighbor Unreachability Detection (NUD). A 6LoWPAN node is also
expected to be an IPv6 host per [RFC8200] which means it should
ignore consumed routing headers and Hop-by-Hop options; when
operating in a RPL network [RFC6550], it is also beneficial to
support IP-in-IP encapsulation [RFC9008]. The 6LoWPAN node should
also support [RFC8505] and use it as the default Neighbor
Discovery method. It is the responsibility of the deployment to
ensure unique global IPv6 addresses for Internet connectivity.
For local-only connectivity IPv6 Unique Local Address (ULA) may be
used. [RFC6775][RFC8505] specifies the 6LoWPAN border router
(6LBR), which is responsible for prefix assignment to the 6LoWPAN
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
network. A 6LBR can be connected to the Internet or to an
enterprise network via one of the interfaces. Please refer to
[RFC7668] and [RFC8105] for examples of address assignment
considerations. In addition, privacy considerations [RFC8065]
must be consulted for applicability. In certain scenarios, the
deployment may not support IPv6 address autoconfiguration due to
regulatory and business reasons and may choose to offer a separate
address assignment service. Address Protection for 6LoWPAN
Neighbor Discovery (AP-ND) [RFC8928] enables Source Address
Validation [RFC6620] and protects the address ownership against
impersonation attacks.
* Broadcast Avoidance: 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery aims at reducing
the amount of multicast traffic of classical Neighbor Discovery,
since IP-level multicast translates into L2 broadcast in many L2
technologies [RFC6775]. 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery relies on a
proactive registration to avoid the use of multicast for address
resolution. It also uses a unicast method for Duplicate Address
Detection (DAD), and avoids multicast lookups from all nodes by
using non-onlink prefixes. Router Advertisements (RAs) are also
sent in unicast, in response to Router Solicitations (RSs)
* Host-to-Router interface: 6lo has defined registration extensions
for 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery [RFC8505]. This effort provides a
host-to-router interface by which a host can request its router to
ensure reachability for the address registered with the router.
Note that functionality has been developed to ensure that such a
host can benefit from routing services in a RPL network [RFC9010]
* Proxy Neighbor Discovery: Further functionality also allows a
device (e.g., an energy-constrained device that needs to sleep
most of the time) to request proxy Neighbor Discovery services
from a 6LoWPAN Backbone Router (6BBR) [RFC8505][RFC8929]. The
latter RFC federates a number of links into a multilink subnet.
* Header Compression: IPv6 header compression [RFC6282] is a vital
part of IPv6 over low power communication. Examples of header
compression over different link-layer specifications are found in
[RFC7668], [RFC8163], and [RFC8105]. A generic header compression
technique is specified in [RFC7400]. For 6LoWPAN networks where
RPL is the routing protocol, there exist 6LoWPAN header
compression extensions which allow also compressing the RPL
artifacts used when forwarding packets in the route-over mesh
[RFC8138] [RFC9035].
* Security and Encryption: Though 6LoWPAN basic specifications do
not address security at the network layer, the assumption is that
L2 security must be present. Nevertheless, care must be taken
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
since specific L2 technologies may exhibit security gaps.
Typically, 6lo L2 technologies (see Section 2) offer security
properties such as confidentiality and/or message authentication.
In addition, end-to-end security is highly desirable. Protocols
such as DTLS/TLS, as well as object security are being used in the
constrained-node network domain
[I-D.ietf-lwig-security-protocol-comparison]. The relevant IETF
working groups should be consulted for application and transport
level security. The IETF has worked on address authentication
[RFC8928] and secure bootstrapping is also being discussed in the
IETF. However, there may be other security mechanisms available
in a deployment through other standards such as hardware-level
security or certificates for the initial booting process. In
order to use security mechanisms, the implementation needs to
afford it in terms of processing capabilities and energy
consumption.
* Additional processing: [RFC8066] defines guidelines for ESC
dispatch octets use in the 6LoWPAN header. The ESC type is
defined to use additional dispatch octets in the 6LoWPAN header.
An implementation may take advantage of the ESC header to offer a
deployment specific processing of 6LoWPAN packets.
4. 6lo Deployment Examples
4.1. Wi-SUN usage of 6lo in network layer
Wireless Smart Ubiquitous Network (Wi-SUN) [Wi-SUN] is a technology
based on IEEE Std 802.15.4g. Wi-SUN networks support star and mesh
topologies, as well as hybrid star/mesh deployments, but these are
typically laid out in a mesh topology where each node relays data for
the network to provide network connectivity. Wi-SUN networks are
deployed on both grid-powered and battery-operated devices [RFC8376].
The main application domains using Wi-SUN are smart utility and smart
city networks. The Wi-SUN Alliance Field Area Network (FAN) covers
primarily outdoor networks. The Wi-SUN Field Area Network
specification defines an IPv6-based protocol suite including TCP/UDP,
IPv6, 6lo adaptation layer, DHCPv6 for IPv6 address management, RPL,
and ICMPv6.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
4.2. Thread usage of 6lo in network layer
Thread is an IPv6-based networking protocol stack built on open
standards, designed for smart home environments, and based on low-
power IEEE Std 802.15.4 mesh networks. Because of its IPv6
foundation, Thread can support existing popular application layers
and IoT platforms, provide end-to-end security, ease development and
enable flexible designs [Thread].
The Thread specification uses the IEEE Std 802.15.4 [IEEE802154]
physical and MAC layers operating at 250 kbps in the 2.4 GHz band.
Thread devices use 6LoWPAN, as defined in [RFC4944][RFC6282], for
transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE Std 802.15.4 networks. Header
compression is used within the Thread network and devices
transmitting messages compress the IPv6 header to minimize the size
of the transmitted packet. The mesh header is supported for link-
layer (i.e., mesh under) forwarding. The mesh header as used in
Thread also allows efficient end-to-end fragmentation of messages
rather than the hop-by-hop fragmentation specified in [RFC4944].
Mesh under routing in Thread is based on a distance vector protocol
in a full mesh topology.
4.3. G3-PLC usage of 6lo in network layer
G3-PLC [G3-PLC] is a narrowband PLC technology that is based on the
ITU-T G.9903 Recommendation [G.9903]. G3-PLC supports multi-hop mesh
network topology, and facilitates highly reliable, long-range
communication. With the abilities to support IPv6 and to cross
transformers, G3-PLC is regarded as one of the next-generation
narrowband PLC technologies. G3-PLC has got massive deployments over
several countries, e.g., Japan and France.
The main application domains using G3-PLC are smart grid and smart
cities. This includes, but is not limited to the following
applications:
* Smart metering
* Vehicle-to-grid communication
* Demand response
* Distribution automation
* Home/Building energy management systems
* Smart street lighting
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
* AMI backbone network
* Wind/Solar farm monitoring
In the G3-PLC specification, the 6lo adaption layer utilizes the
6LoWPAN functions (e.g., header compression, fragmentation and
reassembly). However, due to the different characteristics of the
PLC media, the 6LoWPAN adaptation layer cannot perfectly fulfill the
requirements [RFC9354]. The ESC dispatch type is used in the G3-PLC
to provide fundamental mesh routing and bootstrapping functionalities
[RFC8066].
4.4. Netricity usage of 6lo in network layer
The Netricity program in the HomePlug Powerline Alliance [NETRICITY]
promotes the adoption of products built on the IEEE Std 1901.2 low-
frequency narrowband PLC standard, which provides for urban and long-
distance communications and propagation through transformers of the
distribution network using frequencies below 500 kHz. The technology
also addresses requirements that assure communication privacy and
secure networks.
The main application domains using Netricity are smart grid and smart
cities. This includes, but is not limited to the following
applications:
* Utility grid modernization
* Distribution automation
* Meter-to-Grid connectivity
* Micro-grids
* Grid sensor communications
* Load control
* Demand response
* Net metering
* Street lighting control
* Photovoltaic panel monitoring
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
The Netricity system architecture is based on the physical and MAC
layers of IEEE Std 1901.2. Regarding the 6lo adaptation layer and an
IPv6 network layer, Netricity utilizes IPv6 protocol suite including
6lo/6LoWPAN header compression, DHCPv6 for IP address management, RPL
routing protocol, ICMPv6, and unicast/multicast forwarding. Note
that the L3 routing in Netricity uses RPL in non-storing mode with
the MRHOF (Minimum Rank with Hysteresis Objective Function) objective
function based on their own defined Estimated Transmission Time (ETT)
metric.
5. 6lo Use Case Examples
As IPv6 stacks for constrained node networks use a variation of the
6LoWPAN stack applied to each particular link layer technology,
various 6lo use cases can be provided. In this section, various 6lo
use cases which are based on different link layer technologies are
described.
5.1. Use case of ITU-T G.9959: Smart Home
Z-Wave is one of the main technologies that may be used to enable
smart home applications. Born as a proprietary technology, Z-Wave
was specifically designed for this particular use case. Recently,
the Z-Wave radio interface (physical and MAC layers) has been
standardized as the ITU-T G.9959 specification.
Example: Use of ITU-T G.9959 for Home Automation
A variety of home devices (e.g., light dimmers/switches, plugs,
thermostats, blinds/curtains, and remote controls) are augmented with
ITU-T G.9959 interfaces. A user may turn on/off or may control home
appliances by pressing a wall switch or by pressing a button in a
remote control. Scenes may be programmed, so that after a given
event, the home devices adopt a specific configuration. Sensors may
also periodically send measurements of several parameters (e.g., gas
presence, light, temperature, humidity) which are collected at a sink
device, or may generate commands for actuators (e.g., a smoke sensor
may send an alarm message to a safety system).
The devices involved in the described scenario are nodes of a network
that follows the mesh topology, which is suitable for path diversity
to face indoor multipath propagation issues. The multihop paradigm
allows end-to-end connectivity when direct range communication is not
possible.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
5.2. Use case of Bluetooth LE: Smartphone-based Interaction
The key feature behind the current high Bluetooth LE momentum is its
support in a large majority of smartphones in the market. Bluetooth
LE can be used to allow the interaction between the smartphone and
surrounding sensors or actuators. Furthermore, Bluetooth LE is also
the main radio interface currently available in wearables. Since a
smartphone typically has several radio interfaces that provide
Internet access, such as Wi-Fi or cellular, the smartphone can act as
a gateway for nearby devices such as sensors, actuators or wearables.
Bluetooth LE may be used in several domains, including healthcare,
sports/wellness, and home automation.
Example: Use of Bluetooth LE-based Body Area Network for fitness
A person wears a smartwatch for fitness purposes. The smartwatch has
several sensors (e.g., heart rate, accelerometer, gyrometer, GPS,
temperature), a display, and a Bluetooth LE radio interface. The
smartwatch can show fitness-related statistics on its display.
However, when a paired smartphone is in the range of the smartwatch,
the latter can report almost real-time measurements of its sensors to
the smartphone, which can forward the data to a cloud service on the
Internet. 6lo enables this use case by providing efficient end-to-end
IPv6 support. In addition, the smartwatch can receive notifications
(e.g., alarm signals) from the cloud service via the smartphone. On
the other hand, the smartphone may locally generate messages for the
smartwatch, such as e-mail reception or calendar notifications.
The functionality supported by the smartwatch may be complemented by
other devices such as other on-body sensors, wireless headsets or
head-mounted displays. All such devices may connect to the
smartphone creating a star topology network whereby the smartphone is
the central component. Support for extended network topologies
(e.g., mesh networks) is being developed as of the writing.
5.3. Use case of DECT-ULE: Smart Home
DECT is a technology widely used for wireless telephone
communications in residential scenarios. Since DECT-ULE is a low-
power variant of DECT, DECT-ULE can be used to connect constrained
devices such as sensors and actuators to a Fixed Part, a device that
typically acts as a base station for wireless telephones. In this
case, additionally, the Fixed Part must have a data network
connection. Therefore, DECT-ULE is especially suitable for the
connected home space in application areas such as home automation,
smart metering, safety, and healthcare. Since DECT-ULE uses
dedicated bandwidth, it avoids this coexistence issues suffered by
other technologies that use e.g., ISM frequency bands.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
Example: Use of DECT-ULE for Smart Metering
The smart electricity meter of a home is equipped with a DECT-ULE
transceiver. This device is in the coverage range of the Fixed Part
of the home. The Fixed Part can act as a router connected to the
Internet. This way, the smart meter can transmit electricity
consumption readings through the DECT-ULE link with the Fixed Part,
and the latter can forward such readings to the utility company using
Wide Area Network (WAN) links. The meter can also receive queries
from the utility company or from an advanced energy control system
controlled by the user, which may also be connected to the Fixed Part
via DECT-ULE.
5.4. Use case of MS/TP: Building Automation Networks
The primary use case for IPv6 over MS/TP (6LoBAC) is in building
automation networks. [BACnet] is the open, international standard
protocol for building automation, and MS/TP is defined in [BACnet]
Clause 9. MS/TP was designed to be a low-cost, multi-drop field bus
to interconnect the most numerous elements (sensors and actuators) of
a building automation network to their controllers. A key aspect of
6LoBAC is that it is designed to co-exist with BACnet MS/TP on the
same link, easing the ultimate transition of some BACnet networks to
fundamental end-to-end IPv6 transport protocols. New applications
for 6LoBAC may be found in other domains where low cost, long
distance, and low latency are required. Note that BACnet comprises
various networking solutions other than MS/TP, including the recently
emerged BACnet IP. However, the latter is based on high-speed
Ethernet infrastructure, and it is outside of the constrained node
network scope.
Example: Use of 6LoBAC in Building Automation Networks
The majority of installations for MS/TP are for "terminal" or
"unitary" controllers, i.e., single zone or room controllers that may
connect to HVAC or other controls such as lighting or blinds. The
economics of daisy-chaining a single twisted-pair between multiple
devices is often preferred over home-run, Cat 5-style wiring.
A multi-zone controller might be implemented as an IP router between
a classical Ethernet link and several 6LoBAC links, fanning out to
multiple terminal controllers.
The superior distance capabilities of MS/TP (~1 km) compared to other
6lo media may suggest its use in applications to connect remote
devices to the nearest building infrastructure. For example, remote
pumping or measuring stations with moderate bandwidth requirements
can benefit from the low-cost and robust capabilities of MS/TP over
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
other wired technologies such as DSL, and without the line-of-sight
restrictions or hop-by-hop latency of many low-cost wireless
solutions.
5.5. Use case of NFC: Alternative Secure Transfer
In different applications, a variety of secured data can be handled
and transferred. Depending on the security level of the data,
different transfer methods can be alternatively selected.
Example: Use of NFC for Secure Transfer in Healthcare Services with
Tele-Assistance
A senior citizen who lives alone wears one to several wearable 6lo
devices to measure heartbeat, pulse rate. Other 6lo devices are
densely installed at home for movement detection. A 6LBR at home
will send the sensed information to a connected healthcare center.
Portable base stations with displays may be used to check the data at
home, as well. Data is gathered in both periodic and event-driven
fashion. In this application, event-driven data can be very time-
critical. In addition, privacy also becomes a serious issue in this
case, as the sensed data is very personal.
While the senior citizen is provided audio and video healthcare
services by a tele-assistance based on cellular connections, the
senior citizen can alternatively use NFC connections to transfer the
personal sensed data to the tele-assistance. Hackers can overhear
the data based on the cellular connection, but they cannot gather the
personal data over the NFC connection.
5.6. Use case of PLC: Smart Grid
The smart grid concept is based on deploying numerous operational and
energy measuring sub-systems in an electricity grid system. It
comprises multiple administrative levels/segments to provide
connectivity among these numerous components. Last mile connectivity
is established over the Low Voltage segment, whereas connectivity
over electricity distribution takes place in the High Voltage
segment. Smart grid systems include AMI, Demand Response, Home
Energy Management System, Wide Area Situational Awareness (WASA),
among others.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
Although other wired and wireless technologies are also used in Smart
Grid, PLC enjoys the advantage of reliable data communication over
electrical power lines that are already present, and the deployment
cost can be comparable to wireless technologies. The 6lo-related
scenarios for PLC mainly lie in the LV PLC networks with most
applications in the area of advanced metering infrastructure,
vehicle-to-grid communications, in-home energy management, and smart
street lighting.
Example: Use of PLC for AMI
Household electricity meters transmit time-based data of electric
power consumption through PLC. Data concentrators receive all the
meter data in their corresponding living districts and send them to
the Meter Data Management System through a WAN network (e.g., Medium-
Voltage PLC, Ethernet, or GPRS) for storage and analysis. Two-way
communications are enabled which means smart meters can do actions
like notification of electricity charges according to the commands
from the utility company.
With the existing power line infrastructure as communication medium,
cost on building up the PLC network is naturally saved, and more
importantly, labor and operational costs can be minimized from a
long-term perspective. Furthermore, this AMI application speeds up
electricity charging, reduces losses by restraining power theft, and
helps to manage the health of the grid based on line loss analysis.
Example: Use of PLC (IEEE Std 1901.1) for WASA in Smart Grid
Many sub-systems of Smart Grid require low data rates, and narrowband
variants (e.g., IEEE Std 1901.1) of PLC fulfill such requirements.
Recently, more complex scenarios are emerging that require higher
data rates.
A WASA sub-system is an appropriate example that collects large
amounts of information about the current state of the grid over a
wide area from electric substations as well as power transmission
lines. The collected feedback is used for monitoring, controlling,
and protecting all the sub-systems.
6. IANA Considerations
There are no IANA considerations related to this document.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
7. Security Considerations
This document does not create security concerns in addition to those
described in the Security Considerations sections of the 6lo
adaptation layers considered in this document [RFC7428], [RFC7668],
[RFC8105], [RFC8163], [RFC9159], [I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc], and [RFC9354].
Neighbor Discovery in 6lo links may be susceptible to threats as
detailed in [RFC3756]. Mesh routing is expected to be common in some
6lo networks, such as ITU-T G.9959 networks, BLE mesh networks and
PLC networks. This implies additional threats due to ad hoc routing
as per [KW03]. Most of the L2 technologies considered in this
document (i.e., ITU-T G.9959, BLE, DECT-ULE, and PLC) support link-
layer security. Making use of such provisions will alleviate the
threats mentioned above. Note that NFC is often considered to offer
intrinsic security properties due to its short link range. MS/TP
does not support link-layer security, since in its original BACnet
protocol stack, security is provided at the network layer; thus,
alternative security functionality needs to be used for a 6lo-based
protocol stack over MS/TP.
End-to-end communication is expected to be secured by means of common
mechanisms, such as IPsec, TLS/DTLS, object security [RFC8613], and
EDHOC(Ephemeral Diffie-Hellman Over COSE) [I-D.ietf-lake-edhoc].
The 6lo stack uses the IPv6 addressing model. The implications for
privacy and network performance of using L2-address-derived IPv6
addresses need to be considered [RFC8065].
8. Acknowledgements
Carles Gomez has been funded in part by the Spanish Government
through the Jose Castillejo CAS15/00336 grant, the TEC2016-79988-P
grant, and the PID2019-106808RA-I00 grant, and by Secretaria
d'Universitats i Recerca del Departament d'Empresa i Coneixement de
la Generalitat de Catalunya 2017 through grant SGR 376. His
contribution to this work has been carried out in part during his
stay as a visiting scholar at the Computer Laboratory of the
University of Cambridge.
Thomas Watteyne, Pascal Thubert, Xavier Vilajosana, Daniel Migault,
Jianqiang Hou, Kerry Lynn, S.V.R. Anand, and Seyed Mahdi Darroudi
have provided valuable feedback for this draft.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
Das Subir and Michel Veillette have provided valuable information of
jupiterMesh and Paul Duffy has provided valuable information of Wi-
SUN for this draft. Also, Jianqiang Hou has provided valuable
information of G3-PLC and Netricity for this draft. Take Aanstoot,
Kerry Lynn, and Dave Robin have provided valuable information of MS/
TP and practical use case of MS/TP for this draft.
Deoknyong Ko has provided relevant text of LTE-MTC and he shared his
experience to deploy IPv6 and 6lo technologies over LTE MTC in SK
Telecom.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4861>.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4862, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4862>.
[RFC4919] Kushalnagar, N., Montenegro, G., and C. Schumacher, "IPv6
over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs):
Overview, Assumptions, Problem Statement, and Goals",
RFC 4919, DOI 10.17487/RFC4919, August 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4919>.
[RFC4944] Montenegro, G., Kushalnagar, N., Hui, J., and D. Culler,
"Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4
Networks", RFC 4944, DOI 10.17487/RFC4944, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4944>.
[RFC6568] Kim, E., Kaspar, D., and JP. Vasseur, "Design and
Application Spaces for IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless
Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)", RFC 6568,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6568, April 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6568>.
[RFC6606] Kim, E., Kaspar, D., Gomez, C., and C. Bormann, "Problem
Statement and Requirements for IPv6 over Low-Power
Wireless Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN) Routing",
RFC 6606, DOI 10.17487/RFC6606, May 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6606>.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
[RFC7228] Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for
Constrained-Node Networks", RFC 7228,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7228, May 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7228>.
[RFC7400] Bormann, C., "6LoWPAN-GHC: Generic Header Compression for
IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks
(6LoWPANs)", RFC 7400, DOI 10.17487/RFC7400, November
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7400>.
[RFC7428] Brandt, A. and J. Buron, "Transmission of IPv6 Packets
over ITU-T G.9959 Networks", RFC 7428,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7428, February 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7428>.
[RFC7668] Nieminen, J., Savolainen, T., Isomaki, M., Patil, B.,
Shelby, Z., and C. Gomez, "IPv6 over BLUETOOTH(R) Low
Energy", RFC 7668, DOI 10.17487/RFC7668, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7668>.
[RFC8105] Mariager, P., Petersen, J., Ed., Shelby, Z., Van de Logt,
M., and D. Barthel, "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over
Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications (DECT) Ultra
Low Energy (ULE)", RFC 8105, DOI 10.17487/RFC8105, May
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8105>.
[RFC8163] Lynn, K., Ed., Martocci, J., Neilson, C., and S.
Donaldson, "Transmission of IPv6 over Master-Slave/Token-
Passing (MS/TP) Networks", RFC 8163, DOI 10.17487/RFC8163,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8163>.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
[RFC9159] Gomez, C., Darroudi, S.M., Savolainen, T., and M. Spoerk,
"IPv6 Mesh over BLUETOOTH(R) Low Energy Using the Internet
Protocol Support Profile (IPSP)", RFC 9159,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9159, December 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9159>.
[RFC9354] Hou, J., Liu, B., Hong, Y., Tang, X., and C. Perkins,
"Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Power Line
Communication (PLC) Networks", RFC 9354,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9354, January 2023,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9354>.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
9.2. Informative References
[BACnet] "ASHRAE, "BACnet-A Data Communication Protocol for
Building Automation and Control Networks", ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 135-2016", January 2016,
<https://www.techstreet.com/ashrae/standards/ashrae-
135-2016?product_id=1918140#jumps>.
[BTCorev4.1]
Bluetooth Special Interest Group, "Bluetooth Core
Specification Version 4.1", December 2013,
<https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/specs/core-
specification-4-1/>.
[G.9903] "International Telecommunication Union, "Narrowband
orthogonal frequency division multiplexing power line
communication transceivers for G3-PLC networks", ITU-T
Recommendation", August 2017.
[G.9959] "International Telecommunication Union, "Short range
narrow-band digital radiocommunication transceivers - PHY
and MAC layer specifications", ITU-T Recommendation",
January 2015.
[G3-PLC] "G3-PLC Alliance", <https://g3-plc.com>.
[I-D.ietf-6lo-nfc]
Choi, Y., Hong, Y., and J. Youn, "Transmission of IPv6
Packets over Near Field Communication", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-6lo-nfc-22, 9 March 2023,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-6lo-nfc-
22.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-lake-edhoc]
Selander, G., Mattsson, J., and F. Palombini, "Ephemeral
Diffie-Hellman Over COSE (EDHOC)", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lake-edhoc-19, 3 February 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lake-
edhoc-19>.
[I-D.ietf-lwig-security-protocol-comparison]
Mattsson, J. P., Palombini, F., and M. Vu?ini?,
"Comparison of CoAP Security Protocols", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lwig-security-protocol-
comparison-07, 24 January 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lwig-
security-protocol-comparison-07>.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
[IEEE1901] "IEEE Standard, IEEE Std 1901-2010 - IEEE Standard for
Broadband over Power Line Networks: Medium Access Control
and Physical Layer Specifications", 2010,
<https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/
standard/1901-2010.html>.
[IEEE1901.1]
"IEEE Standard, IEEE Std 1901.1-2018 - IEEE Standard for
Medium Frequency (less than 12 MHz) Power Line
Communications for Smart Grid Applications", 2018,
<https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8360785>.
[IEEE1901.2]
"IEEE Standard, IEEE Std 1901.2-2013 - IEEE Standard for
Low-Frequency (less than 500 kHz) Narrowband Power Line
Communications for Smart Grid Applications", 2013,
<https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1901.2/4833/>.
[IEEE802154]
IEEE Computer Society, "IEEE Standard for Low-Rate
Wireless Networks, IEEE Std. 802.15.4-2020", IEEE , 2020,
<https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.15.4/7029/>.
[IEEE802159]
IEEE Computer Society, "IEEE Standard for Transport of Key
Management Protocol (KMP) Datagrams", 2021,
<https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.15.9/7967/>.
[IPSP] Bluetooth Special Interest Group, "Bluetooth Internet
Protocol Support Profile Specification Version 1.0.0",
December 2014, <https://www.bluetooth.org/en-
us/specification/adopted-specifications>.>.
[KW03] "Karlof, Chris and Wagner, David, "Secure Routing in
Sensor Networks: Attacks and Countermeasures", Elsevier's
AdHoc Networks Journal, Special Issue on Sensor Network
Applications and Protocols vol 1, issues 2-3", September
2003.
[LLCP-1.4] NFC Forum, "NFC Logical Link Control Protocol, Version
1.4", NFC Forum Technical Specification , January 2021,
<https://nfc-forum.org/build/specifications>.
[NETRICITY]
"Netricity program in HomePlug Powerline Alliance",
<https://www.netricity.org/>.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
[RFC3756] Nikander, P., Ed., Kempf, J., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6
Neighbor Discovery (ND) Trust Models and Threats",
RFC 3756, DOI 10.17487/RFC3756, May 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3756>.
[RFC6282] Hui, J., Ed. and P. Thubert, "Compression Format for IPv6
Datagrams over IEEE 802.15.4-Based Networks", RFC 6282,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6282, September 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6282>.
[RFC6550] Winter, T., Ed., Thubert, P., Ed., Brandt, A., Hui, J.,
Kelsey, R., Levis, P., Pister, K., Struik, R., Vasseur,
JP., and R. Alexander, "RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for
Low-Power and Lossy Networks", RFC 6550,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6550, March 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6550>.
[RFC6620] Nordmark, E., Bagnulo, M., and E. Levy-Abegnoli, "FCFS
SAVI: First-Come, First-Served Source Address Validation
Improvement for Locally Assigned IPv6 Addresses",
RFC 6620, DOI 10.17487/RFC6620, May 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6620>.
[RFC6775] Shelby, Z., Ed., Chakrabarti, S., Nordmark, E., and C.
Bormann, "Neighbor Discovery Optimization for IPv6 over
Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)",
RFC 6775, DOI 10.17487/RFC6775, November 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6775>.
[RFC8065] Thaler, D., "Privacy Considerations for IPv6 Adaptation-
Layer Mechanisms", RFC 8065, DOI 10.17487/RFC8065,
February 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8065>.
[RFC8066] Chakrabarti, S., Montenegro, G., Droms, R., and J.
Woodyatt, "IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area
Network (6LoWPAN) ESC Dispatch Code Points and
Guidelines", RFC 8066, DOI 10.17487/RFC8066, February
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8066>.
[RFC8138] Thubert, P., Ed., Bormann, C., Toutain, L., and R. Cragie,
"IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Network
(6LoWPAN) Routing Header", RFC 8138, DOI 10.17487/RFC8138,
April 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8138>.
[RFC8352] Gomez, C., Kovatsch, M., Tian, H., and Z. Cao, Ed.,
"Energy-Efficient Features of Internet of Things
Protocols", RFC 8352, DOI 10.17487/RFC8352, April 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8352>.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
[RFC8376] Farrell, S., Ed., "Low-Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN)
Overview", RFC 8376, DOI 10.17487/RFC8376, May 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8376>.
[RFC8505] Thubert, P., Ed., Nordmark, E., Chakrabarti, S., and C.
Perkins, "Registration Extensions for IPv6 over Low-Power
Wireless Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN) Neighbor
Discovery", RFC 8505, DOI 10.17487/RFC8505, November 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8505>.
[RFC8613] Selander, G., Mattsson, J., Palombini, F., and L. Seitz,
"Object Security for Constrained RESTful Environments
(OSCORE)", RFC 8613, DOI 10.17487/RFC8613, July 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8613>.
[RFC8928] Thubert, P., Ed., Sarikaya, B., Sethi, M., and R. Struik,
"Address-Protected Neighbor Discovery for Low-Power and
Lossy Networks", RFC 8928, DOI 10.17487/RFC8928, November
2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8928>.
[RFC8929] Thubert, P., Ed., Perkins, C.E., and E. Levy-Abegnoli,
"IPv6 Backbone Router", RFC 8929, DOI 10.17487/RFC8929,
November 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8929>.
[RFC9008] Robles, M.I., Richardson, M., and P. Thubert, "Using RPI
Option Type, Routing Header for Source Routes, and IPv6-
in-IPv6 Encapsulation in the RPL Data Plane", RFC 9008,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9008, April 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9008>.
[RFC9010] Thubert, P., Ed. and M. Richardson, "Routing for RPL
(Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks)
Leaves", RFC 9010, DOI 10.17487/RFC9010, April 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9010>.
[RFC9035] Thubert, P., Ed. and L. Zhao, "A Routing Protocol for Low-
Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) Destination-Oriented
Directed Acyclic Graph (DODAG) Configuration Option for
the 6LoWPAN Routing Header", RFC 9035,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9035, April 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9035>.
[Thread] "Thread Group", <https://www.threadgroup.org/Support>.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
[TIA-485-A]
"TIA, "Electrical Characteristics of Generators and
Receivers for Use in Balanced Digital Multipoint Systems",
TIA-485-A (Revision of TIA-485)", March 2003,
<https://global.ihs.com/
doc_detail.cfm?item_s_key=00032964>.
[TS102.939-1]
ETSI, "Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications
(DECT); Ultra Low Energy (ULE); Machine to Machine
Communications; Part 1: Home Automation Network (phase
1)", Technical Specification ETSI TS 102 939-1, V1.2.1,
March 2015, <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/
etsi_ts/102900_102999/10293901/01.02.01_60/
ts_10293901v010201p.pdf>.
[TS102.939-2]
ETSI, ""Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications
(DECT); Ultra Low Energy (ULE); Machine to Machine
Communications; Part 2: Home Automation Network (phase
2)", Technical Specification ETSI TS 102 939-2, V1.1.1,
March 2015, <https://www.etsi.org/deliver/
etsi_ts/102900_102999/10293902/01.01.01_60/
ts_10293902v010101p.pdf>.
[Wi-SUN] "Wi-SUN Alliance", <https://www.wi-sun.org>.
Appendix A. Design Space Dimensions for 6lo Deployment
[RFC6568] lists the dimensions used to describe the design space of
wireless sensor networks in the context of the 6LoWPAN working group.
The design space is already limited by the unique characteristics of
a LoWPAN (e.g., low power, short range, low bit rate). In [RFC6568],
the following design space dimensions are described: Deployment,
Network size, Power source, Connectivity, Multi-hop communication,
Traffic pattern, Mobility, Quality of Service (QoS). However, in
this document, the following design space dimensions are considered:
* Deployment/Bootstrapping: 6lo nodes can be connected randomly, or
in an organized manner. The bootstrapping has different
characteristics for each link layer technology.
* Topology: Topology of 6lo networks may inherently follow the
characteristics of each link layer technology. Point-to-point,
star, tree or mesh topologies can be configured, depending on the
link layer technology considered.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
* L2-Mesh or L3-Mesh: L2-mesh and L3-mesh may inherently follow the
characteristics of each link layer technology. Some link layer
technologies may support L2-mesh and some may not support.
* Multi-link subnet, single subnet: The selection of multi-link
subnet and single subnet depends on connectivity and the number of
6lo nodes.
* Data rate: Typically, the link layer technologies of 6lo have low
rate of data transmission. But, by adjusting the MTU, it can
deliver higher upper layer data rate.
* Buffering requirements: Some 6lo use case may require higher data
rate than the link layer technology support. In this case, a
buffering mechanism, telling the application to throttle its
generation of data, and compression of the data are possible to
manage the data.
* Security and Privacy Requirements: Some 6lo use case can involve
transferring some important and personal data between 6lo nodes.
In this case, high-level security support is required.
* Mobility across 6lo networks and subnets: The movement of 6lo
nodes depends on the 6lo use case. If the 6lo nodes can move or
be moved around, a mobility management mechanism is required.
* Time synchronization requirements: The requirement of time
synchronization of the upper layer service is dependent on the use
case. For some 6lo use case related to health service, the
measured data must be recorded with exact time.
* Reliability and QoS: Some 6lo use case requires high reliability,
for example, real-time or health-related services.
* Traffic patterns: 6lo use cases may involve various traffic
patterns. For example, some 6lo use cases may require short data
lengths and random transmission. Some 6lo use case may require
continuous data transmission and discontinuous data transmission.
* Security Bootstrapping: Without the external operations, 6lo nodes
must have a security bootstrapping mechanism.
* Power use strategy: to enable certain use cases, there may be
requirements on the class of energy availability and the strategy
followed for using power for communication [RFC7228]. Each link
layer technology defines a particular power use strategy which may
be tuned [RFC8352]. Readers are expected to be familiar with
[RFC7228] terminology.
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
* Update firmware requirements: Most 6lo use cases will need a
mechanism for updating firmware. In these cases, support for over
the air updates is required, probably in a broadcast mode when
bandwidth is low and the number of identical devices is high.
* Wired vs. Wireless: Plenty of 6lo link layer technologies are
wireless, except MS/TP and PLC. The selection of wired or
wireless link layer technology is mainly dependent on the
requirements of the 6lo use cases and the characteristics of
wired/wireless technologies.
Authors' Addresses
Yong-Geun Hong
Daejeon University
62 Daehak-ro, Dong-gu
Daejeon
34520
South Korea
Phone: +82 42 280 4841
Email: yonggeun.hong@gmail.com
Carles Gomez
Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya/Fundacio i2cat
C/Esteve Terradas, 7
08860 Castelldefels
Spain
Email: carles.gomez@upc.edu
Younghwan Choi
ETRI
218 Gajeongno, Yuseong
Daejeon
34129
South Korea
Phone: +82 42 860 1429
Email: yhc@etri.re.kr
Abdur Rashid Sangi
Wenzhou-Kean University
88 Daxue Road, Ouhai, Wenzhou
Zhejiang
325060
P.R. China
Email: sangi_bahrian@yahoo.com
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft 6lo Applicability & Use cases April 2023
Samita Chakrabarti
San Jose, CA,
United States of America
Email: samitac.ietf@gmail.com
Hong, et al. Expires 7 October 2023 [Page 30]
