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

Versions: 00 01

ICN Research Group                                              Y. Zhang
Internet-Draft                                            D. Raychadhuri
Intended status: Informational                WINLAB, Rutgers University
Expires: January 17, 2018                                      L. Grieco
                                               Politecnico di Bari (DEI)
                                                              S. Sabrina
                                    Universita degli studi dell Insubria
                                                                  H. Liu
                                      The Catholic University of America
                                                                S. Misra
                                             New Mexico State University
                                                            R. Ravindran
                                                                 G. Wang
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                           July 16, 2017


                     ICN based Architecture for IoT
                draft-zhang-icnrg-icniot-architecture-01

Abstract

   The Internet of Things (IoT) technology promises to connect billions
   of objects to Internet.  Today, the IoT landscape is very fragmented
   from both the technology and service perspectives.  As a consequence,
   it is difficult to integrate and cross-correlate data coming from the
   heterogeneous contexts and build value-added services on top.  This
   reason has motivated the current trend to develop a unified de-
   fragmented IoT architecture so that objects can be made accessible to
   applications across organizations and domains.  Several proposals
   have been made to build a unified IoT architecture as an overlay on
   top of today's Internet.  Such overlay solutions, however, inherit
   the existing limitations of the IP protocol: mobility, security,
   scalability, and communication reliability.  To address this problem,
   A unified IoT architecture based on the Information Centric
   Networking (ICN) architecture, which we call ICN-IoT [1] has been
   proposed.  ICN-IoT leverages the salient features of ICN, and thus
   provides seamless device-to-device (D2D) communication, mobility
   support, scalability, and efficient content and service delivery.
   Furthermore, in order to guarantee the real diffusion of ICN-IoT
   architecture it is fundamental to deal with self-configuring features
   such as device onboarinding and discovery, service discovery,
   scalability, security and privacy requirements, content
   dissemmination since the IoT system will comprise of diverse
   applications with heterogenous requirements including connectivity,
   resource constraints and mobility.  Towards this, the draft
   elaborates on a set of middleware functions to enable large operation
   of an ICN-IoT deployment.



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   This draft begins by motivating the need for an unified ICN-IoT
   architecture to connect heterogeneous IoT systems.  We then propose
   an ICN-IoT system architecture and middleware components which
   includes device/network-service discovery, naming service, IoT
   service discovery, data discovery, user registration, and content
   delivery.  For all of these components, discussions for secure
   solutions are offered.  We also provide discussions on inter-
   connecting heterogeneous ICN-IoT domains.

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 January 17, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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
   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.











Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


Table of Contents

   1.  ICN-Centric Unified IoT Architecture  . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Strengths of ICN-IoT  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  ICN-IoT System Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   3.  ICN-IoT Middleware Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   4.  ICN-IoT Middleware Functions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.1.  Device Onboarding and Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.2.  Detailed Discovery Process  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.3.  Naming Service  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     4.4.  Service Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     4.5.  Context Processing and Storage  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     4.6.  Publish-Subscribe Management  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     4.7.  Security  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
   5.  Support to heterogeneous core networks  . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     5.1.  Interoperability with IP legacy network . . . . . . . . .  23
     5.2.  Named protocol bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     5.3.  Inter-domain Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   6.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26

1.  ICN-Centric Unified IoT Architecture

   In recent years, the current Internet has become inefficient in
   supporting rapidly emerging Internet use cases, e.g., mobility,
   content retrieval, IoT, contextual communication, etc.  As a result,
   Information Centric Networking (ICN) has been proposed as a future
   Internet design to address these inefficiencies.  ICN has the
   following main features: (1) it identifies a network object
   (including a mobile device, a content, a service, or a context) by
   its name instead of its IP address, (2) a hybrid name/address
   routing, and (3) a delay-tolerant transport.  These features make it
   easy to realize many in-network functions, such as mobility support,
   multicasting, content caching, cloud/edge computing and security.

   Considering these salient features of ICN, we propose to build a
   unified IoT architecture, in which the middlware IoT services are
   proposed for administrative purposes such as towards onboarding
   devices, device/service discovery and naming.  Other functions such
   as name publishing, discovery, and delivery of the IoT data/services
   is directly implemented in the ICN network.  Figure 1 shows the
   proposed ICN-IoT approach, which is centered around the ICN network
   instead of today's Internet.








Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


               ______________   __________   __________
              |IoT Smart Home| |IoT Smart | |IoT Smart |
              |Management    | |Transport | |Healthcare|
              |______________| |Management| |Management|
                   \           |__________| |__________|
                    \               |             /
                     \ _____________|___________ /
                      {                         }
                      {                         }
                      {           ICN           }
                      {                         }
                      {_________________________}
                        /           |         \
                       /            |          \
             _________/     ________|______   __\_____________
            {          }   {               } {                }
            {Smart home}   {Smart Transport} {Smart Healthcare}
            {__________}   {_______________} {________________}
              |      |          |      |         |          |
           ___|__  __|___     __|__  __|__   ____|____  ____|____
          |Home-1||Home-2|   |Car-1||Car-2| |Medical  ||Medcical |
          |______||______|   |_____||_____| |Devices-1||Devices-2|
                                            |_________||_________|


             Figure 1: The proposed ICN-IoT unified architecture.


1.1.  Strengths of ICN-IoT

   Our proposed ICN-IoT architecture delivers IoT services over the ICN
   network, which aims to satisfy the requirements of the open IoT
   networking system (discussed in the ICN-IoT design considerations
   draft [1]):

   o  Naming.  In ICN-IoT, we assign a unique name to an IoT object, an
      IoT service, or even a context.  These names are persistent
      throughout their scopes.

   o  Security and privacy.  In ICN-IoT, secure binding between names
      and data objects instead of IP addresses to identify devices/data/
      services, is inherently more secure than the traditional IP
      paradigm [16].

   o  Scalability.  In ICN-IoT, the name resolution is performed in the
      network layer in an online or using a mapping system with name
      state distributed within the entire network.  Thus, it can achieve




Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


      high degree of scalability exploiting features like content
      locality, local computing, and multicasting.

   o  Resource efficiency.  In ICN-IoT, in both the constrained and non-
      constrained parts of the network, only those data that are
      subscribed by applications or requested by clients in the
      specified context will be delivered.  Thus, it offers a resource-
      efficient solution.

   o  Local traffic Pattern.  In ICN-IoT, we can easily cache data or
      deploy computation services in the network, hence making
      communications more localized and reducing the overall traffic
      volume.

   o  Context-aware communications.  ICN-IoT supports contexts at
      different layers, including device layer, networking layer and
      application layer.  Contexts at the device layer include
      information such as battery level or location; contexts at the
      network layer include information such as network status and
      statistics; contexts at the application layer are usually defined
      by individual applications.  In ICN-IoT, device context may be
      available to the network layer, while network elements (i.e.,
      routers) are able to resolve application-layer contexts to lower-
      layer contexts.  As a result of adopting contexts and context-
      aware communications, communications only occur under situations
      that are specified by applications, which can significantly reduce
      the network traffic volume.

   o  Seamless mobility handling.  In ICN-IoT, ICN's name resolution
      layer allows multiple levels of mobility relying on receiver-
      oriented nature for self-recovery for consumers, and using
      multicasting and late-binding techniques to realize seamless
      mobility support of the producing nodes.

   o  Self-Organization: Name based networking allows service level self
      configuration and bootstrapping of devices with minimal
      manufacturer or administrator provisioned configuration.  This
      configuration involves naming, key distribution and trust
      association to enable data exchange between applications and
      services.

   o  Data storage and Caching.  In ICN-IoT, data are stored locally,
      either by the mobile device or by the gateway nodes or at service
      points.  In-network caching [4] also speeds up data delivery and
      also offer local repair over unreliable links such as over
      wireless mediums.





Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   o  Communication reliability.  ICN-IoT supports delay tolerant
      communications [23], which in turn provides reliable
      communications over unreliable links as mentioned earlier.  Also
      opportunistic caching allows to increase the content copies in the
      network to help consumers with diverse application requirements
      (such as operating at different request rates) or situations
      dealing with mobility scenarios.

   o  Ad hoc and infrastructure mode.  ICN-IoT supports both
      applications operating in ad-hoc [2] and infrastructure modes.

   o  In-network processing.  ICN offers in-network processing that
      supports various network services, such as context resolution,
      data aggregation and compression.

2.  ICN-IoT System Architecture

   The ICN-IoT system architecture, which is also a general abstraction
   of an IoT system, is shown in Figure 2, has the following six main
   system components:



     +----------------+      +-----------------+       +-----------------+       +------------------+      +----------------------+
     |Embedded System | <--> | Aggregator      | <-->  | Local Service   | <-->  |    IoT Server    | <--> |Authentication Manager|
     +----------------+      +-----------------+       |     Gateway     |       |                  |      |                      |
            |                            |             +-----------------+       +------------------+      +----------------------+
            |                            |                   ^                           ^
     +----------------+      +----------------+              |                           |
     | Embedded System|      |Aggregator      | <------------                            V
     +----------------+      +----------------+                                 +-------------------+
                                                                                | Services/Consumers|
                                                                                +-------------------+


                                                          Figure 2: ICN-IoT System Architecture


   o  Embedded Systems (ES): The embedded sensor has sensing and
      actuating functions and may also be able to relay data for other
      sensors to the Aggregator, through wireless or wired links.

   o  Aggregator: It interconnects various entities in a local IoT
      network.  Aggregators serve the following functionalities: device
      discovery, service discovery, and name assignment.  Aggregators
      can communication with each other directly or through the local
      service gateway.




Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   o  Local Service Gateway (LSG): A LSG serves the following
      functionalities: (1) it is at the administrative boundary, such
      as, the home or an enterprise, connecting the local IoT system to
      the rest of the global IoT system, (2) it serves to assign ICN
      names to local sensors, (3) it enforces data access policies for
      local IoT devices, and (4) it runs context processing services to
      generate information specified by application-specific contexts
      (instead of raw data) to the IoT server.

   o  IoT Server: Within a given IoT service context, the IoT server is
      a centralized server that maintains subscription memberships and
      provides the lookup service for subscribers.  Unlike legacy IoT
      servers that are involved in the data path from publishers to
      subscribers -- raising the concern of its interfaces being a
      bottleneck -- the IoT server in our architecture is only involved
      in the control path where publishers and subscribers exchange
      their names, certificates, and impose other security functions
      such as access control.

   o  Authentication Manager (AM): The authentication manager serves to
      enable authentication of the embedded devices when they are
      onboarded in the network and also if their identities need to be
      validated at the overall system level.  The authentication manager
      may be co-resident with the LSG or the IoT server, but it can also
      be standalone inside the administrative boundary or outside it.

   o  Services/Consumer: These are other application instances
      interacting with the IoT server to fetch or be notified of
      anything of interest within the scope of the IoT service.

   The logical topology of the IoT system can be mesh-like, with every
   ES attached to one or more aggregators or to another ES, while every
   aggregator is attached to one or more LSG and all the LSGs connected
   to the IoT server.  Thus, each ES has its aggregators, and each of
   which in turn has its LSG.  All ES belonging to the same IoT service
   share the same IoT server.  All the aggregators that are attached to
   the same LSG management are reacheble to to one another hence capable
   of requesting services or content from them.  While such richer
   connectivity improves reliability, it also requires control plane
   sophistication to manage the inter-connection.  Though our discussion
   can be generalized to such mesh topologies, in the rest of the draft,
   we will focus on the tree topology for the sake of simplicity.

3.  ICN-IoT Middleware Architecture

   The proposed ICN-IoT middleware aims to bridge the gap between
   underlying ICN functions, IoT applications and devices to achieve
   self-organizing capability.



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   The middleware functions are shown in Fig. 3 and it includes six core
   functions: device discovery, naming service, service discovery,
   context processing and storage, pub/sub management, and security
   which spans all these functions.

   In contrast to centralized or overlay-based implementation in the
   legacy IP-based IoT platform, ICN-IoT architecture pushes a large
   portion of the functionalities to the network layer, such as name
   resolution, mobility management, in-network processing/caching,
   context processing, which greatly simplifies the middleware design.









































Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


                                +------------------------------------+
                                |         (IoT Middleware)           |
                                |                                    |
                                |   +----------------------+  +--+   |
                                |   |  Pub/Sub Management  |  |  |   |       +---------------------+
                                |   +----------------------+  |  |   |       |      Consumer       |
           +-------------+      |   |Context Processing and|  |S |   |       |  +-------------+    |
           |             |      |   |  Storage             |  |E |   |       |  |             |    |
           | Sensor      |      |   +----------------------+  |C |   |       |  |    App      |    |
           + ----------- +      |   |IoT Service Discovery |  |U |   |       |  +-------------+    |
           |Gateway      |<-->  |   |                      |  |R |   | <-->  |  |  Service    |    |
           +-------------+      |   +----------------------+  |I |   |       |  +-------------+    |
           |Actuator     |      |   |  Naming Service      |  |T |   |       +---------------------+
           +-------------+      |   +----------------------+  |Y |   |
           |Smart thing  |      |   | Device Onboarding    |  |  |   |
           +-------------+      |   | and Discovery        |  |  |   |
                                |   +----------------------+  +--+   |
                                +------------------------------------+
                                          ^          ^
                                          |          |
                                          V          V
                            +---------------------------------------------+
                            |                  ICN Network                |
                            |   +-------------------------------------+   |
                            |   |       In-network Computing          |   |
                            |   |    (Data Aggregation/Fusion)        |   |
                            |   +-------------------------------------+   |
                            |   |         Network Service             |   |
                            |   |      (Multicast/Push/Pull)          |   |
                            |   +-------------------------------------+   |
                            |   |       Name Based Routing            |   |
                            |   +-------------------------------------+   |
                            |   |       Mobility and Security         |   |
                            |   +-------------------------------------+   |
                            +---------------------------------------------+

                    Figure 3: The ICN-IoT Middleware Functions


4.  ICN-IoT Middleware Functions

   For each of these middleware functions we highlight what these
   function achieve, advantages an ICN architecture enables in realizing
   each function, and provide discussion of how the function can be
   realized considering two ICN protocols i.e. NDN [6] and MobilityFirst
   (MF) [5].





Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   Please note most of these middleware functions are implemented on
   unconstrained aggregators, LSGs and the IoT servers, only very
   limited functions (mainly for device discovery and naming service)
   are implemented on resource-constrained ES, while unconstrained
   devices within an aggregator can execute more functions such as
   service discovery.

4.1.  Device Onboarding and Discovery

   In the literature several works do not differentiate between device
   onboarding and device discovery.  In this draft, we make a
   distinction.  The objective of onboarding is to connect new devices
   to the rest and enable them to operate in the ecosystem.  Every
   entity should be exposed to its direct upstream neighbor and may be
   another embedded system or aggregator.  Specifically, it includes the
   following three aspects: (1) a newly added ES should be exposed to
   its neighbor (ES or aggregator) and possibly to its LSG, AM, and the
   IoT server; (2) a newly added aggregator is exposed to its LSG, and
   possibly to its neighbor aggregators; (3) a newly added AM should be
   exposed to the IoT server and the LSG; and (4) a newly added LSG
   should be exposed to the IoT server.  Device discovery serves two
   functions: 1) it is used in the context of discovering neighboring
   ESs to form routing paths, where existing mechanims can be use; 2)
   for device onboarding, on which we focus here.  During onboarding,
   the ES passes its device-level information (such as manufacturer-ID
   and model number) and application-level information (such as service
   type and data type) to the upstream devices.  In the NDN architecture
   (and other name-based approaches), there is no need to identify the
   devices with IDs.  But, if the device is required to have a globally
   unique ICN ID, it can be provided one by the naming service
   (described in Section 4.3), and recorded by the LSG (and possibly the
   aggregator and the IoT server).  As part of the device discovery
   process, each ES will also be assigned a local network ID (LID) that
   is unique in its local domain.  Then the device will use its LID for
   routing within the local domain (i.e.  between ESs and the
   aggregator) because the globally unique ICN ID associated with a
   device is quite long and not energy efficient for constrained IoT
   devices.  One approach to generate a short LID is to hash its
   persistent ID.  In the name-based ICN approaches where device
   identity is not needed, a device can publish within the name scope of
   the aggregator (e.g., /iot/agg1/dev10 for Device numbered 10 under
   aggregator numbered 1).  In most IoT systems, devices interact with
   the aggregator for data or information processing or aggregation,
   hence there is no direct communication between devices under an
   aggregator.  If in some set-up devices under the aggregator need to
   communicate with each other a scalable mechanism is to allow direct
   neighbors to communicate with each other while others communicate
   through the aggregator.



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   ICN enables flexible and context-centric device discovery which is
   important in IoT ecosystem where heterogeneous IoT systems belonging
   to different IoT services may co-exist sharing the same wireless
   resources.  Contextualization is a result of name-based networking
   where different IoT services can agree on unique multicast names that
   can be pre-provisioned in end devices and the network infrastructure
   using the routing control plane.  This also has an advantage of
   localizing device discovery to regions of network relevant to an ICN
   service, also enabling certain level of IoT asset security by
   isolation.  In contrast IP offers no such natural IoT service
   mapping; any forced mapping of this manner will entail high
   configuration cost both in terms of device configuration, and network
   control and forwarding overhead.

4.2.  Detailed Discovery Process

   A device can be an embedded device, a virtual device, a process, or a
   service instance such as a sensing service.  We assume that the
   device has pre-loaded secure keys.  Specifically, we consider both
   resource-constrained devices and resource-rich devices, and assume
   that the pre-loaded secure keys are symmetric keys or passwords for
   the former, while the asymmetric key pair (public key certificate and
   the corresponding private key) for the latter.

   Below we discuss the detailed device discovery process considering
   both resource-constrained devices and resource-rich devices.  As
   assumed for the former there is a mechanism for either securely pre-
   loading symmetric keys or passwords, while for the latter asymmetric
   key-pair using the public key infrastructure and certificate are used
   to exchange/generate the symmetric key (denoted as SMK_{device}).  We
   note that the use of asymmetric keys follows the standard PKI
   procedures with the the use of either self-certificates, certificates
   generated by a local (or domain specific) or global authority.  The
   bootstrapping of the constrained devices with symmetric keys can be
   performed in several ways.  As mentioned, pre-loading the device with
   keys before shipping is one approach, or the symmetric keys can be
   loaded by the administrator (or home owner or site-manager) at the
   time of bootstrapping of the device on-site.  The approach is based
   on the level of trust and the threat model in which the system
   operates.  We also note that with ongoing research constrained
   devices are becoming increasingly powerful and new low-cost and
   computation based PKI approaches are being proposed.  In the future,
   constrained devices may be able to also use PKI mechanisms for
   creating symmetric keys.  In addition, we assume that there is a
   local authentication service (AS) that performs authentication,
   authorization and transient action key distribution.  The local
   authentication service is a logical entity that can be co-hosted at
   the LSG or IoT server.  The location of the AS may be informed by



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   efficiency, security, and trust considerations.  The design offloads
   the complexity to the local AS and simplifies the operations at the
   devices.  Mechanisms can be devised for authenticating and onboarding
   a device onto the IoT network even if the device does not trust its
   neighbors and the aggregator using the AS.  This can be done by
   having the key SMK_{device} shared with an AS, which can be
   communicated this information during device bootstrapping.  The AS is
   used to authenticate the device in the network.  The mechanism can be
   extended for the device to authenticate the network it is connecting
   to as well [10].

   The general steps for device discovery assuming pre-shared symmetric
   keys are as follows :

   o  New device polling: The configuration service periodically sends
      out messages pulling information from new devices.  Then the
      device can communicate its manufacturer ID to the aggregator who
      forwards the message to the AS.  The AS will send back a discover-
      reply, with a nonce encrypted with SMK_{device} and another nonce
      to be used by the device in the reply; this message is forwarded
      back to the device.  The device decrypts the message obtains the
      nonce, and encrypts a concatenation of the two nonces with
      SMK_{device}, which it sends back to the AS.  The AS decrypts the
      content again and authenticates the device.  Then it creates a
      symmetric key to be shared between the aggregator and the device
      and encrypts a copy of the key with a symmetric key shared by the
      aggregator and the other copy with SMK_{device} shared with the
      device and replies back to the device.  The reply message reaches
      the device via the aggregator and they both receive the key to
      perform secure communication.  In NDN, this process can be
      initiated by the configuration service running on the LSG, which
      periodically broadcasts discovery Interests (using the name
      /iot/agg1/discover message) or the discovery can be initiated by
      the new device in the network which can send a discover message
      using its globally unique ID (e.g., manufacturer ID).  If no
      authentication of the device's identity is required, then the
      discover message can be forwarded to the aggregator, which can
      reply with its namespace and a locally unique ID for the device,
      say dev10, so the namespace for the device is /iot/agg1/dev10).
      Or the globally unique ID of the device can also be used as the
      locally unique ID.  This mechanism does not preclude the
      communication between the device and the aggregator going over a
      multi-hop path consisting of other IoT devices that are already
      on-boarded.  If device authentication is required, In MF, we can
      set a group-GUID as the destination address, and the configuration
      service issues a polling via multicasting.  Once the new device
      enters the IoT domain and receives the polling message, it sends a
      association request (AssoReq) message, including its manufacture



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


      ID, or ICN ID (if it has been assigned one before), its network
      and security capabilities, and a message ID which is used for the
      further message exchange between the new device and aggregator.
      If the device is already assigned a symmetric key, it can use the
      symmetric key to communicate with the LSG (the ID can be
      transmitted in clear or by using a pseudonym [17]) to facilitate
      quick identification by the LSG.  If the device can use the PKI, a
      symmetric key can also be generated.  After the aggregator
      receives the AssoReq from the new device, it will request the LSG
      naming service to issue a local LID for this new device.  The
      aggregator shall send an Association Reply (AssoRep) message to
      the new device, which includes the message ID copied from the
      previous AssoReq message from the new device to indicate this
      association reply is for this new device, the selected
      authentication method according to the new device security
      capabilities, the assigned LID.  The AssoRep is sent to the new
      device via a specific multicast group (as the new device does not
      have a routable ID yet at this moment).  The LID is a short ID
      unique in the local IoT domain, and is used for the routing
      purpose in the local domain.  This specification will not limit
      the format of the LID and the method to generate a LID.  If
      authentication is not required, the device discovery is completed
      and the device can communicate with the aggregator using the LID.
      If the Authentication is required, this LID is blocked by the
      aggregator from passing general data traffic between two devices
      until the authentication transaction completes successfully with
      the local authentication service.  The unauthenticated LID can
      only send traffic to the authentication service.  The aggregator
      forwards the traffic between the device and the local AS.  The
      aggregator may also implement the policy to regulate the amount of
      traffic to be sent by an unauthenticated LID to mitigate the DoS
      attack.  If the authentication is required, the following steps
      shall be performed.

   o  Mutual Authentication: The mutual authentication allows only
      authorized device to register and use the network, and to provide
      the device with assurance that it is communicating with a
      legitimate network.  If the authentication is required in the
      AssoRep, the device shall send a Authentication Request (AuReq)
      message to the aggregator using the selected authentication
      method.  The AuReq is signed with the pre-loaded SMK{device} for
      authentication.  The aggregator forwards the AuReq to the local
      AS.  The local AS performs authentication locally or contacts a
      third-party AS according to the authentication method.  If the
      authentication is successful, the local AS generates a master
      symmetric key SMK{device, aggregator} for the communications
      between the device and the aggregator.  It sends Authentication
      Reply (AuRep) with master SMK{device, aggregator} to the device



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


      via the aggregator.  The master SMK{device, aggregator} is
      protected with the pre-loaded SMK{device}. The local AS also sends
      a copy of master SMK{device, aggregator} to the aggregator through
      the secure connection between the local AS and the aggregator.
      This same approach will work equally well in the NDN architecture
      as well.

   o  Key generation and distribution: Once the master SMK{device,
      aggregator} is placed on the device and aggregator, the session
      keys (AKs) and group keys (GTKs) are generated and placed on the
      device and the aggregator for unicast and multicast
      communications, respectively, using the master SMK{device,
      aggregator}.

   o  Protected Data Transfer: The session keys (AKa and AKe) are used
      for message integrity and data confidentiality, respectively,
      which can be renewed periodically.  The renewal can happen using
      key generation functions with the shared secrets and some nonces
      used for generating the new session keys [10].

   The other case is when devices have sufficient resources to run
   asymmetric keys.  That is, the device is pre-loaded with a
   manufacture ID, a pair of public/private keys (PK_{device},
   SK_{device}) and a certificate which binds the device identity and
   public key.  In this case, we also go through the above three steps,
   with the only difference being in the second step which is Mutual
   Authentication.  To illustrate it using MF as the architecture, in
   this case, the AuReq message shall include the device certificate and
   a message authentication code signed by the device private key
   SK_{device}. The local AS will authenticate the device once receiving
   the AuReq.  If the authentication succeeds, then the local AS will
   send the master SMK{device, aggregator} along with its certificate in
   AuRep.  AuRep contains a MAC signed by the local AS private key.  The
   mater SMK{device, aggregator} is encrypted using the device public
   key PK_{device}.  SMK{device, aggregator} will be used for generation
   of AKs to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of future data
   exchange between the device and the aggregator.

4.3.  Naming Service

   The objective of the naming service is to assure that either the
   device or the service itself is authenticated, attempting to prevent
   sybil (or spoofing) attack [18] and that the assigned name closely
   binds to the device (or service).  Naming service assigns and
   authenticates ES and device names.  An effective naming service
   should be secure, persistent, and able to support a large number of
   application agnostic names.




Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   Traditional IoT systems use IP addresses as names, which are insecure
   and non-persistent.  IP addresses also have relatively poor
   scalability, due to their fixed structure.  Instead, ICN separates
   names from locators, and assigns unique and persistent names to each
   ES, which satisfies the above requirements.

   If a device needs a global unique name/ID, but does not have one, it
   may request the naming service to obtain one after it is
   authenticated.  Alternatively, the IoT domain (LSG or aggregator) may
   determine ID (name) for an authenticated device is required based on
   the policy.  The proposed naming process works as follows.  After a
   device has been authenticated, it may request an ID from the naming
   service (or the aggregator, if it can give the device a locally
   unique name).  It sends a ID request (IDReq) to the naming service or
   aggregator.  If the aggregator can accept request to give a unique
   name to the device, it will do that.  For instance, in NDN the device
   can create content within the aggregator's namespace.  If the
   aggregator cannot then it can serve as the devices' proxy and sends
   the IDReq to the naming service at the LSG.  The naming service
   assigns a ID to the device, which can be self-certified or a URI.  .
   The naming service also generates a certificate, binding the ID/
   public key with the devices' manufacture ID or human-readable name.
   The LSG sends the ID reply (IDRep) message to the aggregator that
   sends the IDRep to the device.  The IDRep includes the ID certificate
   and the corresponding private key.  The private key is encrypted and
   the entire message is integrity-protected with AK_{device} when the
   message is delivered to the device.  Alternatively, if the LSG
   determines that an authenticated device requires an ID when the
   aggregator registers this device, it will contact the naming service
   to generate the ID, certificate, and corresponding private key for
   the device.  It sends the ID information to the device.  If the
   device already has a pre-loaded public key, the naming service may
   use this pre-loaded public key as the device's ID.

   The LSG maintains the mapping between every devices' LID and the ID.
   When the LSG receives a message from the external network that is
   intended for a device within the domain, the LSG will translate the
   destination devices' ID (which is included in the message) to its LID
   and then route the message to the device using its LID.  Similarly,
   when the LSG receives a message from within the domain, it will
   replace the source devices' LID with its ID and then forward the
   message to the next-hop router.  Such a mechanism can ensure global
   reachability of any IoT device as well as energy efficiency for
   resource-constrained devices.

   Finally, we note that the same naming mechanism can be used to name
   higher-level IoT devices such as aggregators and LSGs.




Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 15]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


4.4.  Service Discovery

   Service discovery intends to learn IoT services that are hosted by
   one aggregator by its neighbor aggregators.  The aggregators
   themselves learn service capability of the devices during the device
   discovery process or separately after authenticating (or during or
   after naming) them.  The requirements for any discovery mechanism
   includes low protocol overhead (including low latency and low control
   message count), and discovery accuracy.

   In today's IoT platforms, ESs, aggregators and LSGs are connected via
   IP multicast, which involves complicated group management and
   multicast name to IP translation service.  Multicast, however, is
   greatly simplified in ICN as most ICN architectures have natural
   support for multicast.

   Service discovery is widely accepted as an essential element in
   pervasive computing environments.  Many research activities on
   service discovery has been conducted, but privacy has often been
   ignored.  While it is essential that legitimate users can discover
   the services for which they have the proper credentials, it is also
   necessary that services were hidden from illegitimate users.  Since
   service information, service provider's information, service
   requests, and credentials to access services via service discovery
   protocols could be sensitive, it is important to keep them private.
   In [8], the authors present a user-centric model, called Prudent
   Exposure, as an approach designed for exposing minimal information
   privately, securely, and automatically for both service providers and
   users of service discovery protocols.

   Below, we explain how service discovery is implemented.  The key to
   service discovery is to expose aggregator's services to its neighbor
   aggregators.  How this is implemented differs in NDN and MF.

   In NDN, the following procedures are performed: 1) The source
   aggregator broadcasts an interest using the well-known name
   /area/servicename/certificate, which will eventually reach the
   destination aggregator.  NDN's Interest/Data mechanisms allows only
   one response for each Interest sent while discovery may require to
   learn multiple entities.  Efficient discovery can be realized using
   exclusion via Selectors in the protocol or as an overlay protocol
   [7]; 2) The destination aggregator that hosts the service checks the
   certificate and registers the source Aggregator if there is a matched
   service.  It replies with an acknowledgment containing certificate to
   the source aggregator.

   As an example of an NDN smart home, a thermostat expresses a request
   to discover a AC service using well-known name /home/ac/certificate



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 16]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   via broadcast channel.  In MF case, a multicast group GUID 1234 can
   be assigned to all home appliance IoT service.  The thermostat sends
   the request containing the service name and certificate to 1234.  In
   both cases, the AC hosting this service replies with acknowledgment
   if all conditions match.

   As regards to secure multicast service request, it is possible to use
   the following solution in MF.  In fact, especially in MF IoT, secured
   group GUID can be utilized, which may be owned by multiple hosts,
   hence conventional public/private key scheme may not be suitable for
   this case.  For secure service discovery, a secured name needs to
   assigned to the service host.  As an alternative, group key
   management protocol (GKMP) [31] can be adopted to resolve the issue
   above -- A naming service residing at LSG or IoT server (depending on
   application scope) generates a group public key that is used as group
   GUID for a service, then this group public/private keys pair is
   assigned to each Aggregator that hosts this service.  The service
   hosting Aggregator in the group then listen on this group GUID, and
   use the group private key to decrypt the incoming discovery message.
   Finally, we note that this form of secure service discovery is
   difficult for NDN because of the use of self-certified names by MF.

4.5.  Context Processing and Storage

   In order to facilitate context-aware communication and data
   retrieval, we need to support context processing in the IoT system.
   The objective of context processing is to expose the ES's low-level
   context information to upstream aggregators and LSGs, as well as to
   resolve the application's high-level context requirements using
   lower-level ES contexts.  The context processing service usually runs
   on both aggregators and LSGs.

   Context processing requires the underlying network to be able to
   support in-network computing at both application and network levels.
   ICN supports in-networking computing (e.g. using named functions [14]
   and computing layer in MF) and caching, which thus offers unique
   advantages compared to traditional IP network where the support for
   in-network computing and caching is poor.

   Application level contexts differ from application to application,
   and therefore, we need to provide a set of basic mechanisms to
   support efficient context processing.  Firstly, the network needs to
   define a basic set of contextual attributes for devices (including
   ESs, aggregators, and LSGs), including device-level attributes (such
   as location, data type, battery level, multiple interfaces, available
   cache size, etc), network-level attributes (such as ICN names ,
   latency per interface, packet loss rates, etc.), and service-level
   attributes (such as max, min, average, etc.).



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 17]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   Secondly, we need to have means to expose ES/aggregator/LSG
   contextual attributes to the rest of the system, through centralized
   naming resolution service or distributed routing protocols.

   Thirdly, the IoT server needs to allow applications (either producers
   or consumers) to specify their contextual requirements.  Fourthly,
   the unconstrained part of ICN-IoT needs to be able to map the higher-
   level application-specific contextual requirements to lower-level
   device-level, network-level , and service-level contextual
   information.

   Once the contextual requirements and the corresponding mappings are
   in place, then in-network caching can be leveraged to optimize
   overall network performance and system QoS.  In an IoT network,
   cached data can be used to perform data aggregation, in-network
   processing, and quick turnaround for answering queries.  In-network
   caching can also be used to store data that may be relevant to many
   nodes and has temporal popularity in a region, and the processed data
   to serve the users.  The contextual requirements can help define in-
   network processing.  This goes beyond the traditional way of
   aggregators doing the data gathering, processing, and reduction, but
   also moving computation to the data (also termed network functions).
   Network functions in essence serves to move the computation into the
   network for it to happen where the context and the information is
   available, with the results returned to the requester.  In an ICN-IoT
   these functionalities can be easily incorporated at scale.  A good
   use case for both in-network caching and processing is that of an IoT
   network of cameras working together to gather a complete field-of-
   view (FoV) of an area and transmit it for aggregation at the
   aggregator (may be implemented in the pub/sub model).  A user could
   fire a query that involves processing on the gathered field-of-views
   at the aggregator (or some other node storing the FOV-data) to answer
   the query.

   In-network processing can be implemented at the network level and
   application level.  For example, a user may request the information
   regarding the maximum car speed in an area.  With the network-level
   implementation, the user issues a request with a function expression
   /max(/area/carspeed)[14].  The network returns the user the computed
   results.  This result can be obtained in two steps (a)name
   manipulation and orchestration of computation, an aggregator or LSG
   will check whether it already has the cached result for /max(/area/
   carspeed).  If not, it will analyze the function expression, retrieve
   the function /max and the data /area/carspeed, and compute the
   result, or forward the request to another node for execution (b)
   Actual function execution for computation and data processing, that
   is, calculate /max(/area/carspeed).  Alternatively, a user may issue
   a request /carspeed_service{max_car_speed in the area}[22].  The



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 18]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   request is sent to a car_speed service application.  The car speed
   service processes application-level request, i.e. max_car_speed in
   the area.  With the former approach, the data processing and result
   retrieval may be more efficient.  However, the network, that is, the
   aggregators and LSGs should have a runtime execution environment at
   the network layer to understand and process the function expression
   logic.  The later approach is simple and robust because the more
   complex function execution can be performed at the application layer
   using dedicated virtual machines.

4.6.  Publish-Subscribe Management

   Data Publish/Subscribe (Pub/Sub) is an important function for ICN-
   IoT, and is responsible for IoT information resource sharing and
   management.  The objective of pub/sub system is to provide
   centralized membership management service.  Efficient pub/sub
   management poses two main requirements to the underlying system: high
   data availability and low network bandwidth consumption.

   In conventional IP network, most of the IoT platforms provide a
   centralized server to aggregate all IoT service and data.  While this
   centralized architecture ensures high availability, it scales poorly
   and has high bandwidth consumption due to high volume of control/data
   exchange, and poor support of multicast.

   Next we consider two decentralized pub/sub models.  The first one is
   the Rendezvous mode that is commonly used for today's pub/sub
   servers, and the second one involves Data-Control separation that is
   unique to ICN networks where the control messages are handled by the
   centralized IoT server and the data messages are handled by the
   underlying ICN network.  Compared to the popular Rendezvous mode
   where both control and data messages both meet at the centralized
   server, separating data and control messages can greatly improve the
   scalability of the entire system, which is enabled by the ICN
   network.

   In today's IP network, Rendezvous mode is the classic pub/sub scheme
   in which data and requests meet at an intermediate node.  In this
   case the role of the IoT server is only required to authenticate the
   consumers and providing it Rendezvous service ID.

   While NDN is a Pull-based architecture that inherently does not
   support the Pub/Sub mode naturally, there are a couple of approaches
   proposed to create a pub/sub model on top of NDN: namely COPSS [19]
   and persistent interests.  COPSS integrates a push based multicast
   feature with the pull based NDN architecture at the network layer by
   introducing Rendezvous Node(RN).  RN is a network layer logical
   entity that resides in a subset of NDN nodes.  The publisher first



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 19]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   forwards a Content Descriptor (CD) as a snapshot to the RN.  RN
   maintains a subscription table, and receives the subscription message
   from subscriber.  The data publisher just sends the content using
   Publish packet by looking up FIB instead of PIT.  If the same content
   prefix is requested by multiple subscribers, RN will deliver one copy
   of content downstream, which reduces the bandwidth consumption
   substantially.

   Compared with the Rendezvous mode in which data plane and control
   plane both reside on the same ICN network layer, we consider an
   architecture where the control message is handled by the centralized
   server while data is handled by ICN network layer.  Following the
   naming process mentioned above, the LSG has the ICN name for the
   local resource which is available for publishing on IoT server.  IoT
   server maintains the subscription membership, and receives
   subscription requests from subscribers.  Since the subscribers has no
   knowledge about the number of resource providers and their identities
   in a dynamic scenario, IoT server has to take responsibility of
   grouping and assigning group name for the resource.

   MF takes advantage of Group-GUID to identify a service provided by
   multiple resources.  This Group-GUID will be distributed to the
   subscriber as well as the publisher.  In an example of NDN, it uses
   the common prefix/home/monitoring/ to identify a group of resource
   that provides multiple monitoring services such as /home/monitoring/
   temperature and /home/monitoring/light.  The subscriber retrieves the
   prefix from the IoT server, and sends Interest toward the resource.
   In a MF example, GUID-x identifies the "home monitoring" service that
   combines with "light status" and "temperature".  The resource
   producers, i.e. the host of "temperature" and the host of "light
   status" are notified that their services belong to GUID-x, then
   listen on GUID-x.  The subscriber sends the request containing GUID-x
   through multicasting which ultimately reach the producers at the last
   common node.  Once receiving the request, the resource producer
   unicasts the data to the subscriber.  In addition, if multiple
   resource consumers subscribe to the same resource, the idea of Group-
   GUID can be reused to group the consumers to further save bandwidth
   using multicast.

   Another approach to extend the NDN architecture to enable pub/sub is
   for the subscriber(s) to send Interests that are identified as long-
   term Interests [11].  The Interests do not expire from the PIT of the
   intermediate forwarding routers on the path from the publisher to the
   subscribers.  Each time the publisher creates a new content, it
   publishes it into the network, the content reaches each subscriber
   along the reverse-path from the producer based on the faces stored in
   the PIT entry.  However, the Interest is not removed from the PIT
   entry.  This allows the creation of a multicast tree rooted at the



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 20]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   publisher, reaching every subscriber and enables the pushing of
   content from the publisher to the subscribers as needed.

   With a pub/sub framework, important considerations should be given
   towards user registration and content distribution.

   User Registration: A user, who wants to access/subscribe to a
   service, has to perform the registration operation by sending
   information that depends on the specific application domain to the
   IoT server.  The information can be secured with the help of the PKI
   infrastructure.  Upon successful registration the IoT server securely
   transmits an identifier, a user signature key SK_{user} (to be used
   to sign messages), a user encryption key EK_{user} (to communicate
   data confidentially), and an access password to the user in an
   encrypted message.  Upon reception of the message, the user accesses
   the system to modify his/her password (function changePassword).
   With respect to existing secure application-layer solutions, a
   further benefit of the presented approach is the introduction of a
   second level of security, represented by the use of a temporary
   password (immediately replaced) and a couple of keys (signature
   SK_{user} and encryption EK_{user}), which is well suited for the
   heterogeneous and distributed IoT environment.

   Content Distribution: In literature, there are some solutions able to
   guarantee content security [9] [15][12].  In fact, the work presented
   in [9] [12] aims to ensure a high availability of the cached data
   only to legitimate users.  The authors design a security framework
   for ICN able to deliver trusted content securely and efficiently to
   legitimate users/subscribers.  They assume that the content is
   encrypted by the content provider, either at the servers or in the
   content distribution network (if it is trusted), by means of a
   popular symmetric key encryption algorithm.  A group of contents may
   be encrypted using the broadcast encryption key, which only
   legitimate users can decrypt.  The goal is to ensure that the
   encrypted content cannot be used by an entity that is not a
   legitimate user/customer.  The authors achieve this goal by
   guaranteeing that only a legitimate user can obtain the symmetric key
   to decrypt the content, whereas a fake or a revoked user cannot.  In
   this way, the framework does not require any user authentication, for
   example by an online server, each time a content is requested.
   Instead, Zhang et al. in [15] consider trust and security as built-in
   properties for future Internet architecture.  Leveraging the concept
   of named content in recently proposed information centric network,
   the authors proposed a name-based trust and security protection
   mechanism.  Their scheme is built with identity-based cryptography
   (IBC), where the identity of a user or device can act as a public key
   string.  Uniquely, in named content network such as content-centric
   network (CCN), a content name or its prefixes can be used as a public



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 21]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   identity, with which content integrity and authenticity can be
   achieved by means of IBC algorithms.  The trust of a content is
   seamlessly integrated with the verification of the content's
   integrity and authenticity with its name or prefix, instead of the
   public key certificate of its publisher.  In addition, flexible
   confidentiality protection is enabled between content publishers and
   consumers.  For scalable deployment purpose, they further propose to
   use a hybrid scheme combined with traditional public-key
   infrastructure (PKI) and IBC.  Keeping in mind the available
   solutions, in our proposed method, the device sends to the aggregator
   its ICN name, its ID encrypted with its signature key SK_{device} and
   the data encrypted with its own action key AK_{device}, in order to
   guarantee confidentiality and integrity.  The action key AK_{device}
   has been distributed during the device discovery (see Section Device
   discovery).  The aggregator is able to decrypt the data using the
   corresponding action key AK_{device}, stored with the device ID, the
   signature key SK_{device} and the device ICN name obtained during the
   name service (see Section Name service), in particular the aggregator
   uses the device name for identifying the related action key
   AK_{device} (function contentDecryption).  Note that the data are
   encrypted only if it is required by the application domain (i.e.,
   some contexts may not have any security requirements - in this case
   the function contentDecryption is not applied).  As regards the
   content delivery towards a user who subscribes to a service, the ICN
   IoT server transmits to the user the data encrypted with the user
   action key AK_{user} in order to guarantee security and privacy, if
   it is a requirement of the application domain.  The user decrypts the
   received data using his/her action key AK_{user}(function
   contentDecryption).  In such a situation, the services are treated as
   multiple-unicast ones, since the aggregator has to use different keys
   for different devices.  In order to address a multicast approach, a
   group signature key system may be adopted, as in MF approach.

4.7.  Security

   This spans across all the middleware functions.  Generally speaking,
   the security objective is to assure that the device that connects to
   the network should be authenticated, the provided services are
   authenticated and the data generated (through sensing or actuating)
   by both devices and services can be authenticated and kept privacy
   (if needed).  To be specific, we consider the approach to secure
   device discovery, naming service and service discovery, because other
   services, such as pub/sub management and context processing and
   storage, can be properly secured according to application-specific
   demands.






Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 22]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


5.  Support to heterogeneous core networks

5.1.  Interoperability with IP legacy network

   Interoperability between the IP legacy network and ICN networks is an
   important property that the middleware must meet in order to ensure
   the co-existence and gradual migration from the today IP-based
   technologies and protocols.  This could provide a market strength to
   the deployment of the ICN technologies.  To this end, the Internames
   architecture [21][22] provides an embedded capability to manage
   different network domains (or realms), and to support legacy web
   applications and services.  In this sense, a crucial role is played
   by the Name Resolution Service (NRS), whose functionalities can
   decouple names from network locators as function of
   time/location/context/service, and provide ICN functionalities in IP
   networks.  By integrating these functionalities on appropriated nodes
   a distributed database is created to ease internet-working among
   heterogeneous protocol stacks in the core network.

5.2.  Named protocol bridge

   In an heterogeneous network, composed of different ICN networks and
   legacy IP-based networks, interoperability can be pursued, thanks to
   the name-to-name primitives.  To this end, a name-based protocol
   bridge could be deployed at different points of the heterogeneous
   core network so as to provide bridging functionalities at the border
   of different administered network domains.  In order to correctly
   forward the message through the network, the NRS node could aid the
   name-based protocol bridge providing inter-domain routing
   functionalities.

5.3.  Inter-domain Management

   In heterogeneous networks the IoT server has to strictly cooperate
   with the NRS nodes in the core network in order to build a virtual
   network topology to efficiently support Req/Res and Pub/Sub
   functionalities.  The IoT Server could provide the names of the
   internal resources to the NRS, so that when the internal network
   changes, hence the connectivity to the resources.  This ensures that
   the NRS database is always synchronized and updated with every IoT
   subsystems.  In order to support Req/Res and Pub/Sub services
   management efficiently in an heterogeneous core network, the IoT
   Servers of the different administered domains have to strictly
   cooperate with the NRS nodes in the core network.  This is to provide
   internal information of their own administered domain, such as the
   names and or the locators of the internal resources.  When the
   internal network changes, the status of the resources are synced in




Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 23]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   order to maintain an accurate database of the virtual network
   topology view comprising of various IoT subsystems.

6.  Informative References

   [1]        Zhang, Y., Raychadhuri, D., Grieco, L., Baccelli, E.,
              Burke, J., Ravindran, R., Wang, G., Lindgren, A., Ahlgren,
              B., and O. Schelen, "Design Considerations for Applying
              ICN to IoT", draft-zhang-icnrg-icniot-01 (work in
              progress), June 2017.

   [2]        Grassi, G., Pesavento, D., and Giovanni. Pau, "VANET via
              Named Data Networking.", IEEE Conference on Computer
              Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS) , 2014.

   [3]        ICN based Architecture for IoT - Requirements and
              Challenges, ICN-IoT., "https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-
              zhang-icnrg-icniot-requirements-01", IETF/ICNRG 2015.

   [4]        Dong, L., Zhang, Y., and D. Raychaudhuri, "Enhance Content
              Broadcast Efficiency in Routers with Integrated Caching.",
              Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Computers and
              Communications (ISCC) , 2011.

   [5]        NSF FIA project, MobilityFirst.,
              "http://www.nets-fia.net/", 2010.

   [6]        NSF FIA project, NDN., "http://named-data.net/", 2010.

   [7]        Ravindran, R., Biswas, T., Zhang, X., Chakrabort, A., and
              G. Wang, "Information-centric Networking based Homenet",
              ACM, Sigcomm, 2013.

   [8]        Feng, Z., Mutka, M., and L. Ni, "Prudent Exposure: A
              private and user-centric service discovery protocol",
              Pervasive Computing and Communications, 2004, Proceedings
              of the Second IEEE Annual Conference on. IEEE, 2004.

   [9]        Misra, S., Tourani, R., and N. Majd, "Secure content
              delivery in information-centric networks: design,
              implementation, and analyses", Proceedings of the 3rd ACM
              SIGCOMM workshop on Information-centric networking. ACM,
              2013.

   [10]       Mick, T., Misra, S., and R. Tourani, "LASeR: Lightweight
              authentication and secured routing for NDN IoT in smart
              cities", arXiv:1703.08453v1 (in submission in IEEE IoT
              Journal).



Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 24]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   [11]       Tourani, R., Misra, S., Mick, T., and S. Biswal, "iCenS:
              An information-centric smart grid network architecture",
              In IEEE International Conference on Smart Grid
              Communications (SmartGridComm), pp. 417-422, 2016.

   [12]       Misra, S., Tourani, R., Mick, T., Brahma, T., Biswal, S.,
              and D. Ameme, "iCenS: An information-centric smart grid
              network architecture", In IEEE International Conference on
              Smart Grid Communications (SmartGridComm), pp. 417-422,
              2016..

   [13]       Liu, H., Eldaratt, F., Alqahtani, H., Reznik, A., De Foy,
              X., and Y. Zhang, "Mobile Edge Cloud System:
              Architectures, Challenges, and Approaches", IEEE Systems
              Journal, pp. 1-14, DOI: 10.1109/JSYST.2017.2654119, Dec.
              2016..

   [14]       Sifalakis, M., Kohler, B., Scherb, C., and C. Tschudin,
              "An information centric network for computing the
              distribution of computations", In Proceedings of the 1st
              ACM International conference on Information-Centric
              Networking, pp. 137-146, 2014..

   [15]       Zhang, X., "Towards name-based trust and security for
              content-centric network", Network Protocols (ICNP), 2011
              19th IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2011.

   [16]       Nikander, P., Gurtov, A., and T. Henderson, "Host identity
              protocol (HIP): Connectivity, mobility, multi-homing,
              security, and privacy over IPv4 and IPv6 networks", IEEE
              Communications Surveys and Tutorials, pp: 186-204, 2010.

   [17]       Misra, S. and G. Xue, "Efficient anonymity schemes for
              clustered wireless sensor networks", International Journal
              of Sensor Networks, volume 1, number 1/2, pp: 50-63, 2006.

   [18]       Newsome, J., Shi, E., Song, DX., and A. Perrig, "The sybil
              attack in sensor networks: analysis and defenses", IEEE,
              IPSN, 2004.

   [19]       Jiachen, C., Mayutan, A., Lei, J., Xiaoming, Fu., and KK.
              Ramakrishnan, "COPSS: An efficient content oriented
              publish/subscribe system", ACM/IEEE ANCS, 2011.

   [20]       Marica, A., Campolo, C., and A. Molinaro, "Multi-source
              data retrieval in IoT via named data networking", ACM ICN
              Siggcomm, 2014.




Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 25]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   [21]       Blefari-Melazzi, A., Mayutan, A., Detti, A., and KK.
              Ramakrishnan, "Internames: a name-toname principle for the
              future Internet", Proc. of International Workshop on
              Quality, Reliability, and Security in Information-Centric
              Networking (Q-ICN), 2014.

   [22]       Piro, G., Signorello, S., Palatella, M., Grieco, L.,
              Boggia, G., and T. Engel, "Understanding the Social impact
              of ICN: between myth and reality", AI Society: Journal of
              Knowledge, Culture and Communication, Springer, pp. 1-9,
              2016.

   [23]       Nelson, S., Bhanage, G., and D. Raychaudhuri, ""GSTAR:
              generalized storage-aware routing for mobilityfirst in the
              future mobile internet", Proceedings of the sixth
              international workshop on MobiArch, pp. 19--24, 2011.

Authors' Addresses

   Prof.Yanyong Zhang
   WINLAB, Rutgers University
   671, U.S 1
   North Brunswick, NJ  08902
   USA

   Email: yyzhang@winlab.rutgers.edu


   Prof. Dipankar Raychadhuri
   WINLAB, Rutgers University
   671, U.S 1
   North Brunswick, NJ  08902
   USA

   Email: ray@winlab.rutgers.edu


   Prof. Luigi Alfredo Grieco
   Politecnico di Bari (DEI)
   671, U.S 1
   Via Orabona 4, Bari  70125
   Italy

   Email: alfredo.grieco@poliba.it







Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 26]


Internet-Draft       ICN based Architecture for IoT            July 2017


   Sicari Sabrina
   Universita degli studi dell Insubria
   Via Mazzini 5
   Varese, VA  21100
   Italy

   Email: sabrina.sicari@uninsubria.it


   Hang Liu
   The Catholic University of America
   620 Michigan Ave., N.E.
   Washington, DC  20064
   USA

   Email: liuh@cua.edu


   Satyajayant Misra
   New Mexico State University
   1780 E University Ave
   Las Cruces, NM  88003
   USA

   Email: misra@cs.nmsu.edu


   Ravi Ravindran
   Huawei Technologies
   2330 Central Expressway
   Santa Clara, CA  95050
   USA

   Email: ravi.ravindran@huawei.com


   G.Q.Wang
   Huawei Technologies
   2330 Central Expressway
   Santa Clara, CA  95050
   USA

   Email: gq.wang@huawei.com








Zhang, et al.           Expires January 17, 2018               [Page 27]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.123, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/