[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-opsawg-ersue-coman-use-cases) 00 draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases

Internet Engineering Task Force                            M. Ersue, Ed.
Internet-Draft                              Nokia Solutions and Networks
Intended status: Informational                              D. Romascanu
Expires: April 28, 2014                                            Avaya
                                                        J. Schoenwaelder
                                                Jacobs University Bremen
                                                        October 25, 2013


       Management of Networks with Constrained Devices: Use Cases
                 draft-ersue-opsawg-coman-use-cases-00

Abstract

   This document discusses the use cases concerning the management of
   networks, where constrained devices are involved.  A problem
   statement, deployment options and the requirements on the networks
   with constrained devices can be found in the companion document [COM-
   REQ].

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 http://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 April 28, 2014.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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
   (http://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



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.1.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     1.2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  Use Cases  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     2.1.  Environmental Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     2.2.  Medical Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     2.3.  Industrial Applications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     2.4.  Home Automation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     2.5.  Building Automation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     2.6.  Energy Management  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     2.7.  Transport Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     2.8.  Infrastructure Monitoring  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
     2.9.  Community Network Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     2.10. Mobile Applications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     2.11. Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI)  . . . . . . . . . 16
     2.12. MANET Concept of Operations (CONOPS) in Military . . . . . 18
   3.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
   5.  Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
   6.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
     7.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
   Appendix A.  Open issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
   Appendix B.  Change Log  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
     B.1.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-03 -
           draft-ersue-opsawg-coman-use-cases-00  . . . . . . . . . . 30
     B.2.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-02-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
     B.3.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-01-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
     B.4.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-00-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33













Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


1.  Introduction

1.1.  Overview

   Small devices with limited CPU, memory, and power resources, so
   called constrained devices (aka. sensor, smart object, or smart
   device) can be connected to a network.  Such a network of constrained
   devices itself may be constrained or challenged, e.g. with unreliable
   or lossy channels, wireless technologies with limited bandwidth and a
   dynamic topology, needing the service of a gateway or proxy to
   connect to the Internet.  In other scenarios, the constrained devices
   can be connected to a non-constrained network using off-the-shelf
   protocol stacks.  Constrained devices might be in charge of gathering
   information in diverse settings including natural ecosystems,
   buildings, and factories and send the information to one or more
   server stations.

   Network management is characterized by monitoring network status,
   detecting faults, and inferring their causes, setting network
   parameters, and carrying out actions to remove faults, maintain
   normal operation, and improve network efficiency and application
   performance.  The traditional network management application
   periodically collects information from a set of elements that are
   needed to manage, processes the data, and presents them to the
   network management users.  Constrained devices, however, often have
   limited power, low transmission range, and might be unreliable.  They
   might also need to work in hostile environments with advanced
   security requirements or need to be used in harsh environments for a
   long time without supervision.  Due to such constraints, the
   management of a network with constrained devices offers different
   type of challenges compared to the management of a traditional IP
   network.

   This document aims to understand the use cases for the management of
   a network, where constrained devices are involved.  The document
   lists and discusses diverse use cases for the management from the
   network as well as from the application point of view.  The
   application scenarios discussed aim to show where networks of
   constrained devices are expected to be deployed.  For each
   application scenario, we first briefly describe the characteristics
   followed by a discussion on how network management can be provided,
   who is likely going to be responsible for it, and on which time-scale
   management operations are likely to be carried out.

   A problem statement, deployment and management topology options as
   well as the requirements on the networks with constrained devices can
   be found in the companion document [COM-REQ].




Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


1.2.  Terminology

   This documents builds on the terminology defined in
   [I-D.ietf-lwig-terminology] and [COM-REQ].
   [I-D.ietf-lwig-terminology] is a base document for the terminology
   concerning constrained devices and constrained networks.













































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


2.  Use Cases

2.1.  Environmental Monitoring

   Environmental monitoring applications are characterized by the
   deployment of a number of sensors to monitor emissions, water
   quality, or even the movements and habits of wildlife.  Other
   applications in this category include earthquake or tsunami early-
   warning systems.  The sensors often span a large geographic area,
   they can be mobile, and they are often difficult to replace.
   Furthermore, the sensors are usually not protected against tampering.

   Management of environmental monitoring applications is largely
   concerned with the monitoring whether the system is still functional
   and the roll-out of new constrained devices in case the system looses
   too much of its structure.  The constrained devices themselves need
   to be able to establish connectivity (auto-configuration) and they
   need to be able to deal with events such as loosing neighbors or
   being moved to other locations.

   Management responsibility typically rests with the organization
   running the environmental monitoring application.  Since these
   monitoring applications must be designed to tolerate a number of
   failures, the time scale for detecting and recording failures is for
   some of these applications likely measured in hours and repairs might
   easily take days.  However, for certain environmental monitoring
   applications, much tighter time scales may exist and might be
   enforced by regulations (e.g., monitoring of nuclear radiation).

2.2.  Medical Applications

   Constrained devices can be seen as an enabling technology for
   advanced and possibly remote health monitoring and emergency
   notification systems, ranging from blood pressure and heart rate
   monitors to advanced devices capable to monitor implanted
   technologies, such as pacemakers or advanced hearing aids.  Medical
   sensors may not only be attached to human bodies, they might also
   exist in the infrastructure used by humans such as bathrooms or
   kitchens.  Medical applications will also be used to ensure
   treatments are being applied properly and they might guide people
   losing orientation.  Fitness and wellness applications, such as
   connected scales or wearable heart monitors, encourage consumers to
   exercise and empower self-monitoring of key fitness indicators.
   Different applications use Bluetooth, Wi-Fi or Zigbee connections to
   access the patient's smartphone or home cellular connection to access
   the Internet.

   Constrained devices that are part of medical applications are managed



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   either by the users of those devices or by an organization providing
   medical (monitoring) services for physicians.  In the first case,
   management must be automatic and or easy to install and setup by
   average people.  In the second case, it can be expected that devices
   be controlled by specially trained people.  In both cases, however,
   it is crucial to protect the privacy of the people to which medical
   devices are attached.  Even though the data collected by a heart beat
   monitor might be protected, the pure fact that someone carries such a
   device may need protection.  As such, certain medical appliances may
   not want to participate in discovery and self-configuration protocols
   in order to remain invisible.

   Many medical devices are likely to be used (and relied upon) to
   provide data to physicians in critical situations since the biggest
   market is likely elderly and handicapped people.  As such, fault
   detection of the communication network or the constrained devices
   becomes a crucial function that must be carried out with high
   reliability and, depending on the medical appliance and its
   application, within seconds.

2.3.  Industrial Applications

   Industrial Applications and smart manufacturing refer not only to
   production equipment, but also to a factory that carries out
   centralized control of energy, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air
   conditioning), lighting, access control, etc. via a network.  For the
   management of a factory it is becoming essential to implement smart
   capabilities.  From an engineering standpoint, industrial
   applications are intelligent systems enabling rapid manufacturing of
   new products, dynamic response to product demand, and real-time
   optimization of manufacturing production and supply chain networks.
   Potential industrial applications e.g. for smart factories and smart
   manufacturing are:

   o  Digital control systems with embedded, automated process controls,
      operator tools, as well as service information systems optimizing
      plant operations and safety.

   o  Asset management using predictive maintenance tools, statistical
      evaluation, and measurements maximizing plant reliability.

   o  Smart sensors detecting anomalies to avoid abnormal or
      catastrophic events.

   o  Smart systems integrated within the industrial energy management
      system and externally with the smart grid enabling real-time
      energy optimization.




Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   Sensor networks are an essential technology used for smart
   manufacturing.  Measurements, automated controls, plant optimization,
   health and safety management, and other functions are provided by a
   large number of networked sectors.  Data interoperability and
   seamless exchange of product, process, and project data are enabled
   through interoperable data systems used by collaborating divisions or
   business systems.  Intelligent automation and learning systems are
   vital to smart manufacturing but must be effectively integrated with
   the decision environment.  Wireless sensor networks (WSN) have been
   developed for machinery Condition-based Maintenance (CBM) as they
   offer significant cost savings and enable new functionalities.
   Inaccessible locations, rotating machinery, hazardous areas, and
   mobile assets can be reached with wireless sensors.  WSNs can provide
   today wireless link reliability, real-time capabilities, and quality-
   of-service and enable industrial and related wireless sense and
   control applications.

   Management of industrial and factory applications is largely focused
   on the monitoring whether the system is still functional, real-time
   continuous performance monitoring, and optimization as necessary.
   The factory network might be part of a campus network or connected to
   the Internet.  The constrained devices in such a network need to be
   able to establish configuration themselves (auto-configuration) and
   might need to deal with error conditions as much as possible locally.
   Access control has to be provided with multi-level administrative
   access and security.  Support and diagnostics can be provided through
   remote monitoring access centralized outside of the factory.

   Management responsibility is typically owned by the organization
   running the industrial application.  Since the monitoring
   applications must handle a potentially large number of failures, the
   time scale for detecting and recording failures is for some of these
   applications likely measured in minutes.  However, for certain
   industrial applications, much tighter time scales may exist, e.g. in
   real-time, which might be enforced by the manufacturing process or
   the use of critical material.

2.4.  Home Automation

   Home automation includes the control of lighting, heating,
   ventilation, air conditioning, appliances, and entertainment devices
   to improve convenience, comfort, energy efficiency, and security.  It
   can be seen as a residential extension of building automation.

   Home automation networks need a certain amount of configuration
   (associating switches or sensors to actors) that is either provided
   by electricians deploying home automation solutions or done by
   residents by using the application user interface to configure (parts



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   of) the home automation solution.  Similarly, failures may be
   reported via suitable interfaces to residents or they might be
   recorded and made available to electricians in charge of the
   maintenance of the home automation infrastructure.

   The management responsibility lies either with the residents or it
   may be outsourced to electricians providing management of home
   automation solutions as a service.  The time scale for failure
   detection and resolution is in many cases likely counted in hours to
   days.

2.5.  Building Automation

   Building automation comprises the distributed systems designed and
   deployed to monitor and control the mechanical, electrical and
   electronic systems inside buildings with various destinations (e.g.,
   public and private, industrial, institutions, or residential).
   Advanced Building Automation Systems (BAS) may be deployed
   concentrating the various functions of safety, environmental control,
   occupancy, security.  More and more the deployment of the various
   functional systems is connected to the same communication
   infrastructure (possibly Internet Protocol based), which may involve
   wired or wireless communications networks inside the building.

   Building automation requires the deployment of a large number (10-
   100.000) of sensors that monitor the status of devices, and
   parameters inside the building and controllers with different
   specialized functionality for areas within the building or the
   totality of the building.  Inter-node distances between neighboring
   nodes vary between 1 to 20 meters.  Contrary to home automation, in
   building management the devices are expected to be managed assets and
   known to a set of commissioning tools and a data storage, such that
   every connected device has a known origin.  The management includes
   verifying the presence of the expected devices and detecting the
   presence of unwanted devices.

   Examples of functions performed by such controllers are regulating
   the quality, humidity, and temperature of the air inside the building
   and lighting.  Other systems may report the status of the machinery
   inside the building like elevators, or inside the rooms like
   projectors in meeting rooms.  Security cameras and sensors may be
   deployed and operated on separate dedicated infrastructures connected
   to the common backbone.  The deployment area of a BAS is typically
   inside one building (or part of it) or several buildings
   geographically grouped in a campus.  A building network can be
   composed of subnets, where a subnet covers a floor, an area on the
   floor, or a given functionality (e.g. security cameras).




Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   Some of the sensors in Building Automation Systems (for example fire
   alarms or security systems) register, record and transfer critical
   alarm information and therefore must be resilient to events like loss
   of power or security attacks.  This leads to the need that some
   components and subsystems operate in constrained conditions and are
   separately certified.  Also in some environments, the malfunctioning
   of a control system (like temperature control) needs to be reported
   in the shortest possible time.  Complex control systems can
   misbehave, and their critical status reporting and safety algorithms
   need to be basic and robust and perform even in critical conditions.

   Building Automation solutions are deployed in some cases in newly
   designed buildings, in other cases it might be over existing
   infrastructures.  In the first case, there is a broader range of
   possible solutions, which can be planned for the infrastructure of
   the building.  In the second case the solution needs to be deployed
   over an existing structure taking into account factors like existing
   wiring, distance limitations, the propagation of radio signals over
   walls and floors.  As a result, some of the existing WLAN solutions
   (e.g.  IEEE 802.11 or IEEE 802.15) may be deployed.  In mission-
   critical or security sensitive environments and in cases where link
   failures happen often, topologies that allow for reconfiguration of
   the network and connection continuity may be required.  Some of the
   sensors deployed in building automation may be very simple
   constrained devices for which class 0 or class 1 may be assumed.

   For lighting applications, groups of lights must be defined and
   managed.  Commands to a group of light must arrive within 200 ms at
   all destinations.  The installation and operation of a building
   network has different requirements.  During the installation, many
   stand-alone networks of a few to 100 nodes co-exist without a
   connection to the backbone.  During this phase, the nodes are
   identified with a network identifier related to their physical
   location.  Devices are accessed from an installation tool to connect
   them to the network in a secure fashion.  During installation, the
   setting of parameters to common values to enable interoperability may
   occur (e.g.  Trickle parameter values).  During operation, the
   networks are connected to the backbone while maintaining the network
   identifier to physical location relation.  Network parameters like
   address and name are stored in DNS.  The names can assist in
   determining the physical location of the device.

2.6.  Energy Management

   EMAN working group developed [I-D.ietf-eman-framework], which defines
   a framework for providing Energy Management for devices within or
   connected to communication networks.  This document observes that one
   of the challenges of energy management is that a power distribution



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   network is responsible for the supply of energy to various devices
   and components, while a separate communication network is typically
   used to monitor and control the power distribution network.  Devices
   that have energy management capability are defined as Energy Devices
   and identified components within a device (Energy Device Components)
   can be monitored for parameters like Power, Energy, Demand and Power
   Quality.  If a device contains batteries, they can be also monitored
   and managed.

   Energy devices differ in complexity and may include basic sensors or
   switches, specialized electrical meters, or power distribution units
   (PDU), and subsystems inside the network devices (routers, network
   switches) or home or industrial appliances.  An Energy Management
   System is a combination of hardware and software used to administer a
   network with the primary purpose being Energy Management.  The
   operators of such a system are either the utility providers or
   customers that aim to control and reduce the energy consumption and
   the associated costs.  The topology in use differs and the deployment
   can cover areas from small surfaces (individual homes) to large
   geographical areas.  EMAN requirements document [RFC6988] discusses
   the requirements for energy management concerning monitoring and
   control functions.

   It is assumed that Energy Management will apply to a large range of
   devices of all classes and networks topologies.  Specific resource
   monitoring like battery utilization and availability may be specific
   to devices with lower physical resources (device classes C0 or C1).

   Energy Management is especially relevant to Smart Grid.  A Smart Grid
   is an electrical grid that uses data networks to gather and act on
   energy and power-related information, in an automated fashion with
   the goal to improve the efficiency, reliability, economics, and
   sustainability of the production and distribution of electricity.  As
   such Smart Grid provides sustainable and reliable generation,
   transmission, distribution, storage and consumption of electrical
   energy based on advanced energy and ICT solutions and as such enables
   e.g. following specific application areas: Smart transmission
   systems, Demand Response/Load Management, Substation Automation,
   Advanced Distribution Management, Advanced Metering Infrastructure
   (AMI), Smart Metering, Smart Home and Building Automation,
   E-mobility, etc.

   Smart Metering is a good example of a M2M application and can be
   realized as one of the vertical applications in an M2M environment.
   Different types of possibly wireless small meters produce all
   together a huge amount of data, which is collected by a central
   entity and processed by an application server.  The M2M
   infrastructure can be provided by a mobile network operator as the



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   meters in urban areas will have most likely a cellular or WiMAX
   radio.

   Smart Grid is built on a distributed and heterogeneous network and
   can use a combination of diverse networking technologies, such as
   wireless Access Technologies (WiMAX, Cellular, etc.), wireline and
   Internet Technologies (e.g., IP/MPLS, Ethernet, SDH/PDH over Fiber
   optic, etc.) as well as low-power radio technologies enabling the
   networking of smart meters, home appliances, and constrained devices
   (e.g.  BT-LE, ZigBee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, etc.).  The operational
   effectiveness of the smart grid is highly dependent on a robust, two-
   way, secure, and reliable communications network with suitable
   availability.

   The management of a distributed system like smart grid requires an
   end-to-end management of and information exchange through different
   type of networks.  However, as of today there is no integrated smart
   grid management approach and no common smart grid information model
   available.  Specific smart grid applications or network islands use
   their own management mechanisms.  For example, the management of
   smart meters depends very much on the AMI environment they have been
   integrated to and the networking technologies they are using.  In
   general, smart meters do only need seldom reconfiguration and they
   send a small amount of redundant data to a central entity.  For a
   discussion on the management needs of an AMI network see
   Section 2.11.  The management needs for Smart Home and Building
   Automation are discussed in Section 2.4 and Section 2.5.

2.7.  Transport Applications

   Transport Application is a generic term for the integrated
   application of communications, control, and information processing in
   a transportation system.  Transport telematics or vehicle telematics
   are used as a term for the group of technologies that support
   transportation systems.  Transport applications running on such a
   transportation system cover all modes of the transport and consider
   all elements of the transportation system, i.e. the vehicle, the
   infrastructure, and the driver or user, interacting together
   dynamically.  The overall aim is to improve decision making, often in
   real time, by transport network controllers and other users, thereby
   improving the operation of the entire transport system.  As such,
   transport applications can be seen as one of the important M2M
   service scenarios with the involvement of manifold small devices.

   The definition encompasses a broad array of techniques and approaches
   that may be achieved through stand-alone technological applications
   or as enhancements to other transportation communication schemes.
   Examples for transport applications are inter and intra vehicular



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   communication, smart traffic control, smart parking, electronic toll
   collection systems, logistic and fleet management, vehicle control,
   and safety and road assistance.

   As a distributed system, transport applications require an end-to-end
   management of different types of networks.  It is likely that
   constrained devices in a network (e.g. a moving in-car network) have
   to be controlled by an application running on an application server
   in the network of a service provider.  Such a highly distributed
   network including mobile devices on vehicles is assumed to include a
   wireless access network using diverse long distance wireless
   technologies such as WiMAX, 3G/LTE or satellite communication, e.g.
   based on an embedded hardware module.  As a result, the management of
   constrained devices in the transport system might be necessary to
   plan top-down and might need to use data models obliged from and
   defined on the application layer.  The assumed device classes in use
   are mainly C2 devices.  In cases, where an in-vehicle network is
   involved, C1 devices with limited capabilities and a short-distance
   constrained radio network, e.g.  IEEE 802.15.4 might be used
   additionally.

   Management responsibility typically rests within the organization
   running the transport application.  The constrained devices in a
   moving transport network might be initially configured in a factory
   and a reconfiguration might be needed only rarely.  New devices might
   be integrated in an ad-hoc manner based on self-management and
   -configuration capabilities.  Monitoring and data exchange might be
   necessary to do via a gateway entity connected to the back-end
   transport infrastructure.  The devices and entities in the transport
   infrastructure need to be monitored more frequently and can be able
   to communicate with a higher data rate.  The connectivity of such
   entities does not necessarily need to be wireless.  The time scale
   for detecting and recording failures in a moving transport network is
   likely measured in hours and repairs might easily take days.  It is
   likely that a self-healing feature would be used locally.

2.8.  Infrastructure Monitoring

   Infrastructure monitoring is concerned with the monitoring of
   infrastructures such as bridges, railway tracks, or (offshore)
   windmills.  The primary goal is usually to detect any events or
   changes of the structural conditions that can impact the risk and
   safety of the infrastructure being monitored.  Another secondary goal
   is to schedule repair and maintenance activities in a cost effective
   manner.

   The infrastructure to monitor might be in a factory or spread over a
   wider area but difficult to access.  As such, the network in use



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   might be based on a combination of fixed and wireless technologies,
   which use robust networking equipment and support reliable
   communication.  It is likely that constrained devices in such a
   network are mainly C2 devices and have to be controlled centrally by
   an application running on a server.  In case such a distributed
   network is widely spread, the wireless devices might use diverse
   long-distance wireless technologies such as WiMAX, or 3G/LTE, e.g.
   based on embedded hardware modules.  In cases, where an in-building
   network is involved, the network can be based on Ethernet or wireless
   technologies suitable for in-building usage.

   The management of infrastructure monitoring applications is primarily
   concerned with the monitoring of the functioning of the system.
   Infrastructure monitoring devices are typically rolled out and
   installed by dedicated experts and changes are rare since the
   infrastructure itself changes rarely.  However, monitoring devices
   are often deployed in unsupervised environments and hence special
   attention must be given to protecting the devices from being
   modified.

   Management responsibility typically rests with the organization
   owning the infrastructure or responsible for its operation.  The time
   scale for detecting and recording failures is likely measured in
   hours and repairs might easily take days.  However, certain events
   (e.g., natural disasters) may require that status information be
   obtained much more quickly and that replacements of failed sensors
   can be rolled out quickly (or redundant sensors are activated
   quickly).  In case the devices are difficult to access, a self-
   healing feature on the device might become necessary.

2.9.  Community Network Applications

   Community networks are comprised of constrained routers in a multi-
   hop mesh topology, communicating over a lossy, and often wireless
   channel.  While the routers are mostly non-mobile, the topology may
   be very dynamic because of fluctuations in link quality of the
   (wireless) channel caused by, e.g., obstacles, or other nearby radio
   transmissions.  Depending on the routers that are used in the
   community network, the resources of the routers (memory, CPU) may be
   more or less constrained - available resources may range from only a
   few kilobytes of RAM to several megabytes or more, and CPUs may be
   small and embedded, or more powerful general-purpose processors.
   Examples of such community networks are the FunkFeuer network
   (Vienna, Austria), FreiFunk (Berlin, Germany), Seattle Wireless
   (Seattle, USA), and AWMN (Athens, Greece).  These community networks
   are public and non-regulated, allowing their users to connect to each
   other and - through an uplink to an ISP - to the Internet.  No fee,
   other than the initial purchase of a wireless router, is charged for



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   these services.  Applications of these community networks can be
   diverse, e.g., location based services, free Internet access, file
   sharing between users, distributed chat services, social networking
   etc, video sharing etc.

   As an example of a community network, the FunkFeuer network comprises
   several hundred routers, many of which have several radio interfaces
   (with omnidirectional and some directed antennas).  The routers of
   the network are small-sized wireless routers, such as the Linksys
   WRT54GL, available in 2011 for less than 50 Euros.  These routers,
   with 16 MB of RAM and 264 MHz of CPU power, are mounted on the
   rooftops of the users.  When new users want to connect to the
   network, they acquire a wireless router, install the appropriate
   firmware and routing protocol, and mount the router on the rooftop.
   IP addresses for the router are assigned manually from a list of
   addresses (because of the lack of autoconfiguration standards for
   mesh networks in the IETF).

   While the routers are non-mobile, fluctuations in link quality
   require an ad hoc routing protocol that allows for quick convergence
   to reflect the effective topology of the network (such as NHDP
   [RFC6130] and OLSRv2 [I-D.ietf-manet-olsrv2] developed in the MANET
   WG).  Usually, no human interaction is required for these protocols,
   as all variable parameters required by the routing protocol are
   either negotiated in the control traffic exchange, or are only of
   local importance to each router (i.e. do not influence
   interoperability).  However, external management and monitoring of an
   ad hoc routing protocol may be desirable to optimize parameters of
   the routing protocol.  Such an optimization may lead to a more stable
   perceived topology and to a lower control traffic overhead, and
   therefore to a higher delivery success ratio of data packets, a lower
   end-to-end delay, and less unnecessary bandwidth and energy usage.

   Different use cases for the management of community networks are
   possible:

   o  One single Network Management Station (NMS), e.g. a border gateway
      providing connectivity to the Internet, requires managing or
      monitoring routers in the community network, in order to
      investigate problems (monitoring) or to improve performance by
      changing parameters (managing).  As the topology of the network is
      dynamic, constant connectivity of each router towards the
      management station cannot be guaranteed.  Current network
      management protocols, such as SNMP and Netconf, may be used (e.g.,
      using interfaces such as the NHDP-MIB [RFC6779]).  However, when
      routers in the community network are constrained, existing
      protocols may require too many resources in terms of memory and
      CPU; and more importantly, the bandwidth requirements may exceed



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 14]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


      the available channel capacity in wireless mesh networks.
      Moreover, management and monitoring may be unfeasible if the
      connection between the NMS and the routers is frequently
      interrupted.

   o  A distributed network monitoring, in which more than one
      management station monitors or manages other routers.  Because
      connectivity to a server cannot be guaranteed at all times, a
      distributed approach may provide a higher reliability, at the cost
      of increased complexity.  Currently, no IETF standard exists for
      distributed monitoring and management.

   o  Monitoring and management of a whole network or a group of
      routers.  Monitoring the performance of a community network may
      require more information than what can be acquired from a single
      router using a network management protocol.  Statistics, such as
      topology changes over time, data throughput along certain routing
      paths, congestion etc., are of interest for a group of routers (or
      the routing domain) as a whole.  As of 2012, no IETF standard
      allows for monitoring or managing whole networks, instead of
      single routers.

2.10.  Mobile Applications

   M2M services are increasingly provided by mobile service providers as
   numerous devices, home appliances, utility meters, cars, video
   surveillance cameras, and health monitors, are connected with mobile
   broadband technologies.  This diverse range of machines brings new
   network and service requirements and challenges.  Different
   applications e.g. in a home appliance or in-car network use
   Bluetooth, Wi-Fi or Zigbee and connect to a cellular module acting as
   a gateway between the constrained environment and the mobile cellular
   network.

   Such a gateway might provide different options for the connectivity
   of mobile networks and constrained devices, e.g.:

   o  a smart phone with 3G/4G and WLAN radio might use BT-LE to connect
      to the devices in a home area network,

   o  a femtocell might be combined with home gateway functionality
      acting as a low-power cellular base station connecting smart
      devices to the application server of a mobile service provider.

   o  an embedded cellular module with LTE radio connecting the devices
      in the car network with the server running the telematics service,





Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 15]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   o  an M2M gateway connected to the mobile operator network supporting
      diverse IoT connectivity technologies including ZigBee and CoAP
      over 6LoWPAN over IEEE 802.15.4.

   Common to all scenarios above is that they are embedded in a service
   and connected to a network provided by a mobile service provider.
   Usually there is a hierarchical deployment and management topology in
   place where different parts of the network are managed by different
   management entities and the count of devices to manage is high (e.g.
   many thousands).  In general, the network is comprised by manifold
   type and size of devices matching to different device classes.  As
   such, the managing entity needs to be prepared to manage devices with
   diverse capabilities using different communication or management
   protocols.  In case the devices are directly connected to a gateway
   they most likely are managed by a management entity integrated with
   the gateway, which itself is part of the Network Management System
   (NMS) run by the mobile operator.  Smart phones or embedded modules
   connected to a gateway might be themselves in charge to manage the
   devices on their level.  The initial and subsequent configuration of
   such a device is mainly based on self-configuration and is triggered
   by the device itself.

   The challenges in the management of devices in a mobile application
   are manifold.  Firstly, the issues caused through the device mobility
   need to be taken into consideration.  While the cellular devices are
   moving around or roaming between different regional networks, they
   should report their status to the corresponding management entities
   with regard to their proximity and management hierarchy.  Secondly, a
   variety of device troubleshooting information needs to be reported to
   the management system in order to provide accurate service to the
   customer.  Third but not least, the NMS and the used management
   protocol need to be tailored to keep the cellular devices lightweight
   and as energy efficient as possible.

   The data models used in these scenario are mostly derived from the
   models of the operator NMS and might be used to monitor the status of
   the devices and to exchange the data sent by or read from the
   devices.  The gateway might be in charge of filtering and aggregating
   the data received from the device as the information sent by the
   device might be mostly redundant.

2.11.  Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI)

   An AMI network enables an electric utility to retrieve frequent
   electric usage data from each electric meter installed at a
   customer's home or business.  With an AMI network, a utility can also
   receive immediate notification of power outages when they occur,
   directly from the electric meters that are experiencing those



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 16]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   outages.  In addition, if the AMI network is designed to be open and
   extensible, it could serve as the backbone for communicating with
   other distribution automation devices besides meters, which could
   include transformers and reclosers.

   In this use case, each meter in the AMI network contains a
   constrained device.  These devices are typically C2 devices.  Each
   meter connects to a constrained mesh network with a low-bandwidth
   radio.  These radios can be 50, 150, or 200 kbps at raw link speed,
   but actual network throughput may be significantly lower due to
   forward error correction, multihop delays, MAC delays, lossy links,
   and protocol overhead.

   The constrained devices are used to connect the metering logic with
   the network, so that usage data and outage notifications can be sent
   back to the utility's headend systems over the network.  These
   headend systems are located in a data center managed by the utility,
   and may include meter data collection systems, meter data management
   systems, and outage management systems.

   The meters are connected to a mesh network, and each meter can act as
   both a source of traffic and as a router for other meters' traffic.
   In a typical AMI application, smaller amounts of traffic (read
   requests, configuration) flow "downstream" from the headend to the
   mesh, and larger amounts of traffic flow "upstream" from the mesh to
   the headend.  However, during a firmware update operation, larger
   amounts of traffic might flow downstream while smaller amounts flow
   upstream.  Other applications that make use of the AMI network may
   have their own distinct traffic flows.

   The mesh network is anchored by a collection of higher-end devices,
   which contain a mesh radio that connects to the constrained network
   as well as a backhaul link that connects to a less-constrained
   network.  The backhaul link could be cellular, WiMAX, or Ethernet,
   depending on the backhaul networking technology that the utility has
   chosen.  These higher-end devices (termed "routers" in this use case)
   are typically installed on utility poles throughout the service
   territory.  Router devices are typically less constrained than
   meters, and often contain the full routing table for all the
   endpoints routing through them.

   In this use case, the utility typically installs on the order of 1000
   meters per router.  The collection of meters comprised in a local
   network that are routing through a specific router is called in this
   use case a Local Meter Network (LMN).  When powered on, each meter is
   designed to discover the nearby LMNs, select the optimal LMN to join,
   and select the optimal meters in that LMN to route through when
   sending data to the headend.  After joining the LMN, the meter is



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 17]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   designed to continuously monitor and optimize its connection to the
   LMN, and it may change routes and LMNs as needed.

   Each LMN may be configured e.g. to share an encryption key, providing
   confidentiality for all data traffic within the LMN.  This key may be
   obtained by a meter only after an end-to-end authentication process
   based on certificates, ensuring that only authorized and
   authenticated meters are allowed to join the LMN, and by extension,
   the mesh network as a whole.

   After joining the LMN, each endpoint obtains a routable and possibly
   private IPv6 address that enables end-to-end communication between
   the headend systems and each meter.  In this use case, the meters are
   always-on.  However, due to lossy links and network optimization, not
   every meter will be immediately accessible, though eventually every
   meter will be able to exchange data with the headend.

   In a large AMI deployment, there may be 10 million meters supported
   by 10.000 routers, spread across a very large geographic area.
   Within a single LMN, the meters may range between 1 and approx. 20
   hops from the router.  During the deployment process, these meters
   are installed and turned on in large batches, and those meters must
   be authenticated, given addresses, and provisioned with any
   configuration information necessary for their operation.  During
   deployment and after deployment is finished, the network must be
   monitored continuously and failures must be handled.  Configuration
   parameters may need to be changed on large numbers of devices, but
   most of the devices will be running the same configuration.
   Moreover, eventually, the firmware in those meters will need to be
   upgraded, and this must also be done in large batches because most of
   the devices will be running the same firmware image.

   Because there may be thousands of routers, this operational model
   (batch deployment, automatic provisioning, continuous monitoring,
   batch reconfiguration, batch firmware update) should also apply to
   the routers as well as the constrained devices.  The scale is
   different (thousands instead of millions) but still large enough to
   make individual management impractical for routers as well.

2.12.  MANET Concept of Operations (CONOPS) in Military

   The use case on the Concept of Operations (CONOPS) focuses on the
   configuration and monitoring of networks that are currently being
   used in military and as such, it offers insights and challenges of
   network management that military agencies are facing.

   As technology advances, military networks nowadays become large and
   consist of varieties of different types of equipments that run



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 18]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   different protocols and tools that obviously increase complexity of
   the tactical networks.  Moreover, lacks of open common interfaces and
   Application Programming Interface (API) are often a challenge to
   network management.  Configurations are, most likely, manually
   performed.  Some devices do not support IP networks.  Integration and
   evaluation process are no longer trivial for a large set of protocols
   and tools.  In addition, majority of protocols and tools developed by
   vendors that are being used are proprietary which makes integration
   more difficult.  The main reason that leads to this problem is that
   there is no clearly defined standard for the MANET Concept of
   Operations (CONOPS).  In the following, a set of scenarios of network
   operations are described, which might lead to the development of
   network management protocols and a framework that can potentially be
   used in military networks.

   Note: The term "node" is used at IETF for either a host or router.
   The term "unit" or "mobile unit" in military (e.g.  Humvees, tanks)
   is a unit that contains multiple routers, hosts, and/or other non-IP-
   based communication devices.

   Scenario: Parking Lot Staging Area:

   The Parking Lot Staging Area is the most common network operation
   that is currently widely used in military prior to deployment.  MANET
   routers, which can be identical such as the platoon leader's or
   rifleman's radio, are shipped to a remote location along with a Fixed
   Network Operations Center (NOC), where they are all connected over
   traditional wired or wireless networks.  The Fixed NOC then performs
   mass-configuration and evaluation of configuration processes.  The
   same concept can be applied to mobile units.  Once all units are
   successfully configured, they are ready to be deployed.


   +---------+             +----------+
   |  Fixed  |<---+------->| router_1 |
   |   NOC   |    |        +----------+
   +---------+    |
                  |        +----------+
                  +------->| router_2 |
                  |        +----------+
                  |            0
                  |            0
                  |            0
                  |        +----------+
                  +------->| router_N |
                           +----------+





Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 19]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


                    Figure 1: Parking Lot Staging Area

   Scenario: Monitoring with SatCom Reachback:

   The Monitoring with SatCom Reachback, which is considered another
   possible common scenario to military's network operations, is similar
   to the Parking Lot Staging Area.  Instead, the Fixed NOC and MANET
   routers are connected through a Satellite Communications (SatCom)
   network.  The Monitoring with SatCom Reachback is a scenario where
   MANET routers are augmented with SatCom Reachback capabilities while
   On-The-Move (OTM).  Vehicles carrying MANET routers support multiple
   types of wireless interfaces, including High Capacity Short Range
   Radio interfaces as well as Low Capacity OTM SatCom interfaces.  The
   radio interfaces are the preferred interfaces for carrying data
   traffic due to their high capacity, but the range is limiting with
   respect to connectivity to a Fixed NOC.  Hence, OTM SatCom interfaces
   offer a more persistent but lower capacity reachback capability.  The
   existence of a SatCom persistent Reachback capability offers the NOC
   the ability to monitor and manage the MANET routers over the air.
   Similarly to the Parking Lot Staging scenario, the same concept can
   be applied to mobile units.


                            ---   +--+    ---
                           /  /---|SC|---/  /
                           ---    +--+   ---
   +---------+                      |
   |  Fixed  |<---------------------+
   |   NOC   |       +--------------|
   +---------+       |              +-------------------+
                     |              |                   |
                 +----------+       |               +----------+
                 | router_1 |       +----------+    | router_N |
                 +----------+       |          |    +----------+
                     *              |          |      *   *
                     *        +----------+     |      *   *
                     *********| router_2 |*****|*******   *
                              +----------+     |          *
                                   *           |          *
                                   *       +----------+   *
                                   ********| router_3 |****
                                           +----------+

         ---  SatCom links
         ***  Radio links


        Figure 2: Monitoring with one-hop SatCom Reachback network



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 20]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   Scenario: Hierarchical Management:

   Another reasonable scenario common to military operations in a MANET
   environment is the Hierarchical Management scenario.  Vehicles carry
   a rather complex set of networking devices, including routers running
   MANET control protocols.  In this hierarchical architecture, the
   MANET mobile unit has a rather complex internal architecture where a
   local manager within the unit is responsible for local management.
   The local management includes management of the MANET router and
   control protocols, the firewall, servers, proxies, hosts and
   applications.  In addition, a standard management interface is
   required in this architecture.  Moreover, in addition to requiring
   standard management interfaces into the components comprising the
   MANET nodal architecture, the local manager is responsible for local
   monitoring and the generation of periodic reports back to the Fixed
   NOC.



































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 21]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


                               Interface
                               |
                               V
   +---------+             +-------------------------+
   |  Fixed  |  Interface  | +---+     +---+         |
   |   NOC   |<---+------->| | R |--+--| F |         |
   +---------+    |        | +---+  |  +---+         |
                  |        |        |    |  +---+    |
                  |        | +---+  |    +--| P |    |
                  |        | | M |--+    |  +---+    |
                  |        | +---+       |           |
                  |        |             |  +---+    |
                  |        |             +--| D |    |
                  |        |             |  +---+    |
                  |        |             |           |
                  |        |             |  +---+    |
                  |        |             +--| H |    |
                  |        |             |  +---+    |
                  |        | unit_1                  |
                  |        +-------------------------+
                  |
                  |
                  |        +--------+
                  +------->| unit_2 |
                  |        +--------+
                  |             0
                  |             0
                  |             0
                  |        +--------+
                  +------->| unit_N |
                           +--------+

         Key: R-Router
              F-Firewall
              P-PEP (Performance Enhancing Proxy)
              D-Servers, e.g., DNS
              H-hosts
              M-Local Manager



                     Figure 3: Hierarchical Management

   Scenario: Management over Lossy/Intermittent Links:

   In the future of military operations, the standard management will be
   done over lossy and intermittent links and ideally the Fixed NOC will
   become mobile.  In this architecture, the nature and current quality



Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 22]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   of each link are distinct.  However, there are a number of issues
   that would arise and need to be addressed:

   1.  Common and specific configurations are undefined:

       A.  When mass-configuring devices, common set of configurations
           are undefined at this time.

       B.  Similarly, when performing a specific device, set of specific
           configurations is unknown.

   2.  Once the total number of units becomes quite large, scalability
       would be an issue and need to be addressed.

   3.  The state of the devices are different and may be in various
       states of operations, e.g., ON/OFF, etc.

   4.  Pushing large data files over reliable transport, e.g., TCP,
       would be problematic.  Would a new mechanism of transmitting
       large configurations over the air in low bandwidth be
       implemented?  Which protocol would be used at transport layer?

   5.  How to validate network configuration (and local configuration)
       is complex, even when to cutover is an interesting question.

   6.  Security as a general issue needs to be addressed as it could be
       problematic in military operations.




   +---------+             +----------+
   |  Mobile |<----------->| router_1 |
   |   NOC   |?--+         +----------+
   +---------+    |
         ^        |        +----------+
         |        +------->| router_2 |
         |                 +----------+
         |                     0
         |                     0
         |                     0
         |                 +----------+
         +---------------->| router_N |
                           +----------+


            Figure 4: Management over Lossy/intermittent Links




Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 23]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


3.  IANA Considerations

   This document does not introduce any new code-points or namespaces
   for registration with IANA.

   Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
   RFC.












































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 24]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


4.  Security Considerations

   This document discusses the use cases for a network of constrained
   devices and does not introduce any security issues by itself.















































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 25]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


5.  Contributors

   Following persons made significant contributions to and reviewed this
   document:

   o  Ulrich Herberg (Fujitsu Laboratories of America) contributed the
      Section 2.9 on Community Network Applications.

   o  Peter van der Stok contributed to Section 2.5 on Building
      Automation.

   o  Zhen Cao contributed to Section 2.10 on Mobile Applications.

   o  Gilman Tolle contributed the Section 2.11 on Automated Metering
      Infrastructure.

   o  James Nguyen and Ulrich Herberg contributed the Section 2.12 on
      MANET Concept of Operations (CONOPS) in Military.

































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 26]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


6.  Acknowledgments

   Following persons reviewed and provided valuable comments to
   different versions of this document:

   Dominique Barthel, Carsten Bormann, Zhen Cao, Benoit Claise, Bert
   Greevenbosch, Ulrich Herberg, James Nguyen, Anuj Sehgal, Zach Shelby,
   and Peter van der Stok.

   The editors would like to thank the reviewers and the participants on
   the Coman maillist for their valuable contributions and comments.








































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 27]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

7.2.  Informative References

   [RFC6130]  Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., and J. Dean, "Mobile Ad Hoc
              Network (MANET) Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)",
              RFC 6130, April 2011.

   [RFC6779]  Herberg, U., Cole, R., and I. Chakeres, "Definition of
              Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol",
              RFC 6779, October 2012.

   [RFC6988]  Quittek, J., Chandramouli, M., Winter, R., Dietz, T., and
              B. Claise, "Requirements for Energy Management", RFC 6988,
              September 2013.

   [I-D.ietf-lwig-terminology]
              Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for
              Constrained Node Networks", draft-ietf-lwig-terminology-05
              (work in progress), July 2013.

   [I-D.ietf-eman-framework]
              Parello, J., Claise, B., Schoening, B., and J. Quittek,
              "Energy Management Framework",
              draft-ietf-eman-framework-11 (work in progress),
              October 2013.

   [I-D.ietf-manet-olsrv2]
              Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Jacquet, P., and U. Herberg,
              "The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2",
              draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-19 (work in progress), March 2013.

   [COM-REQ]  Ersue, M., "Constrained Management: Problem statement and
              Requirements", draft-ersue-coman-prostate-reqs (work in
              progress), October 2013.














Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 28]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


Appendix A.  Open issues

   o  It has been noted that the use cases the Industrial Application,
      Home Automation and Building Automation have an intersect.















































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 29]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


Appendix B.  Change Log

B.1.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-03 -
      draft-ersue-opsawg-coman-use-cases-00

   o  Reduced the terminology section for terminology addressed in the
      LWIG and Coman Requirements drafts.  Referenced the other drafts.

   o  Checked and aligned all terminology against the LWIG terminology
      draft.

   o  Spent some effort to resolve the intersection between the
      Industrial Application, Home Automation and Building Automation
      use cases.

   o  Moved section section 3.  Use Cases from the companion document
      [COM-REQ] to this draft.

   o  Reformulation of some text parts for more clarity.

B.2.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-02-03

   o  Extended the terminology section and removed some of the
      terminology addressed in the new LWIG terminology draft.
      Referenced the LWIG terminology draft.

   o  Moved Section 1.3. on Constrained Device Classes to the new LWIG
      terminology draft.

   o  Class of networks considering the different type of radio and
      communication technologies in use and dimensions extended.

   o  Extended the Problem Statement in Section 2. following the
      requirements listed in Section 4.

   o  Following requirements, which belong together and can be realized
      with similar or same kind of solutions, have been merged.

      *  Distributed Management and Peer Configuration,

      *  Device status monitoring and Neighbor-monitoring,

      *  Passive Monitoring and Reactive Monitoring,

      *  Event-driven self-management - Self-healing and Periodic self-
         management,





Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 30]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


      *  Authentication of management systems and Authentication of
         managed devices,

      *  Access control on devices and Access control on management
         systems,

      *  Management of Energy Resources and Data models for energy
         management,

      *  Software distribution (group-based firmware update) and Group-
         based provisioning.

   o  Deleted the empty section on the gaps in network management
      standards, as it will be written in a separate draft.

   o  Added links to mentioned external pages.

   o  Added text on OMA M2M Device Classification in appendix.

B.3.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-01-02

   o  Extended the terminology section.

   o  Added additional text for the use cases concerning deployment
      type, network topology in use, network size, network capabilities,
      radio technology, etc.

   o  Added examples for device classes in a use case.

   o  Added additional text provided by Cao Zhen (China Mobile) for
      Mobile Applications and by Peter van der Stok for Building
      Automation.

   o  Added the new use cases 'Advanced Metering Infrastructure' and
      'MANET Concept of Operations in Military'.

   o  Added the section 'Managing the Constrainedness of a Device or
      Network' discussing the needs of very constrained devices.

   o  Added a note that the requirements in [COM-REQ] need to be seen as
      standalone requirements and the current document does not
      recommend any profile of requirements.

   o  Added a section in [COM-REQ] for the detailed requirements on
      constrained management matched to management tasks like fault,
      monitoring, configuration management, Security and Access Control,
      Energy Management, etc.




Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 31]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


   o  Solved nits and added references.

   o  Added Appendix A on the related development in other bodies.

   o  Added Appendix B on the work in related research projects.

B.4.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-00-01

   o  Splitted the section on 'Networks of Constrained Devices' into the
      sections 'Network Topology Options' and 'Management Topology
      Options'.

   o  Added the use case 'Community Network Applications' and 'Mobile
      Applications'.

   o  Provided a Contributors section.

   o  Extended the section on 'Medical Applications'.

   o  Solved nits and added references.































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 32]


Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases       October 2013


Authors' Addresses

   Mehmet Ersue (editor)
   Nokia Solutions and Networks

   Email: mehmet.ersue@nsn.com


   Dan Romascanu
   Avaya

   Email: dromasca@avaya.com


   Juergen Schoenwaelder
   Jacobs University Bremen

   Email: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de

































Ersue, et al.            Expires April 28, 2014                [Page 33]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/