draft-ietf-roll-mopex-cap-00.txt		draft-ietf-roll-mopex-cap-01.txt
	ROLL R. Jadhav, Ed.		ROLL R. Jadhav, Ed.
	Internet-Draft Huawei Tech		Internet-Draft Huawei Tech
	Intended status: Standards Track P. Thubert		Intended status: Standards Track P. Thubert
	Expires: February 10, 2020 Cisco		Expires: May 4, 2020 Cisco
	August 9, 2019		M. Richardson
			Sandelman Software Works
			November 1, 2019
	Mode of Operation extension and Capabilities		Mode of Operation extension and Capabilities
	draft-ietf-roll-mopex-cap-00		draft-ietf-roll-mopex-cap-01
	Abstract		Abstract
	RPL allows different mode of operations which allows nodes to have a		RPL allows different mode of operations which allows nodes to have a
	consensus on the basic primitives that must be supported to join the		consensus on the basic primitives that must be supported to join the
	network. The MOP field in RFC6550 is of 3 bits and is fast		network. The MOP field in RFC6550 is of 3 bits and is fast
	depleting. This document extends the MOP field specification and		depleting. This document extends the MOP field specification and
	adds a notion of capabilities using which the nodes can further		adds a notion of capabilities using which the nodes can further
	advertise their support for, possibly optional, capabilities.		advertise their support for, possibly optional, capabilities.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 36 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 38 ¶
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on February 10, 2020.		This Internet-Draft will expire on May 4, 2020.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 2, line 16 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 18 ¶
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	1.1. Requirements Language and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . 3		1.1. Requirements Language and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . 3
	2. Requirements for this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Requirements for this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. Extended MOP Control Message Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3. Extended MOP Control Message Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	3.1. Final MOP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3.1. Final MOP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	3.2. Handling MOPex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		3.2. Handling MOPex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	4. Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		4. Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	4.1. Capability Control Message Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		4.1. Capability Control Message Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4.2. Capabilities Handshake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		4.2. Capabilities Handshake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5. Implementations Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		5. Implementations Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7.1. Mode of operation: MOPex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		7.1. Mode of operation: MOPex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	7.2. New options: MOPex and Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . 7		7.2. New options: MOPex and Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7.3. New Registry for Extended-MOP-value . . . . . . . . . . . 7		7.3. New Registry for Extended-MOP-value . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7.4. New Registry for Capabilities Flags . . . . . . . . . . . 7		7.4. New Registry for Capabilities Flags . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	Appendix A. Capability Handshake Example . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		Appendix A. Capability Handshake Example . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	RPL [RFC6550] specifies a proactive distance-vector based routing		RPL [RFC6550] specifies a proactive distance-vector based routing
	scheme. The protocol creates a DAG-like structure which operates		scheme. The protocol creates a DAG-like structure which operates
	with a given "Mode of Operation" (MOP) determining the minimal and		with a given "Mode of Operation" (MOP) determining the minimal and
	mandatory set of primitives to be supported by all the participating		mandatory set of primitives to be supported by all the participating
	nodes.		nodes.
	MOP as per [RFC6550] is a 3-bit value carried in DIO messages and is		MOP as per [RFC6550] is a 3-bit value carried in DIO messages and is
	skipping to change at page 5, line 38 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 7 ¶
	nodes and handshaked as part of RPL signaling. Capabilities are		nodes and handshaked as part of RPL signaling. Capabilities are
	embedded as RPL control message option as defined Section 6.7 of		embedded as RPL control message option as defined Section 6.7 of
	[RFC6550] in the base messages of DIO, DAO and DAO-ACK signaling.		[RFC6550] in the base messages of DIO, DAO and DAO-ACK signaling.
	Note that capabilities and MOPex are mutually exclusive and it is		Note that capabilities and MOPex are mutually exclusive and it is
	possible for an implementation to support either or both of the		possible for an implementation to support either or both of the
	options.		options.
	4.1. Capability Control Message Option		4.1. Capability Control Message Option
	0 1 2 3		0 1 2 3
	0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1		0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Type = TODO | Capabilities Flags |		| Type = TODO | Option Length | Capabilities TLVs
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	Figure 2: Capabilities Option		Figure 2: Capabilities Option
	There are no capability flags defined by this document.		Multiple capabilities could be sent in the same message. The length
			field allows the message parser to skip the capability TLV parsing.
			0 1 2 3
			0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
			+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
			| CAPType |J|C|I|. . . . .| CAPInfo(Opt)
			+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
			Figure 3: Capabilities TLV
			Every capability is identified by its type and it may have an
			optional Capability Info. Note that a given capability may or may
			not be diseminated with additional information depending on the 'I'
			flag.
			J = Join only as leaf if capability not understood
			C = Copy capability to children
			I = Cap Info present
			0 1 2 3
			0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
			+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
			| CAPLen | Cap Info(format decided by individual cap spec)
			+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
			Figure 4: Capabilities Info
			Capability Information provides additional information for the given
			capability. The format of this field should be defined as part the
			individual capability specification and is beyond the scope of this
			document. This document provides a container format for carrying the
			capability and its context information.
	4.2. Capabilities Handshake		4.2. Capabilities Handshake
	The root node could advertise the set of capabilities it supports in		The root node could advertise the set of capabilities it supports in
	the DIO message. A node could take advantage of the knowledge that		the DIO message. A node could take advantage of the knowledge that
	the root supports a particular capability. Similarly a node could		the root supports a particular capability. Similarly a node could
	advertise its capabilities in the DAO message using the capability		advertise its capabilities in the DAO message using the capability
	control message option defined in this document. Capabilities		control message option defined in this document. Capabilities
	advertised by non-root nodes are strictly a subset of the		advertised by non-root nodes are strictly a subset of the
	capabilities advertised by the root.		capabilities advertised by the root.
	skipping to change at page 8, line 47 ¶		skipping to change at page 10, line 19 ¶
	| | |		| | |
	| | DAO(CS2) |		| | DAO(CS2) |
	| |<-----------|		| |<-----------|
	| DAO(CS2) | |		| DAO(CS2) | |
	|<------------| |		|<------------| |
	| | |		| | |
	CS: Capabilities Set		CS: Capabilities Set
	CS1: Capabilities set advertised by root		CS1: Capabilities set advertised by root
	CS2: Capabilities set advertised by node. CS2 is a subset of CS1.		CS2: Capabilities set advertised by node. CS2 is a subset of CS1.
	Figure 3: Capabilities Option		Figure 5: Capabilities Option
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Rahul Arvind Jadhav (editor)		Rahul Arvind Jadhav (editor)
	Huawei Tech		Huawei Tech
	Kundalahalli Village, Whitefield,		Kundalahalli Village, Whitefield,
	Bangalore, Karnataka 560037		Bangalore, Karnataka 560037
	India		India
	Phone: +91-080-49160700		Phone: +91-080-49160700
	skipping to change at line 401 ¶		skipping to change at page 10, line 41 ¶
	Pascal Thubert		Pascal Thubert
	Cisco Systems, Inc		Cisco Systems, Inc
	Building D		Building D
	45 Allee des Ormes - BP1200		45 Allee des Ormes - BP1200
	MOUGINS - Sophia Antipolis 06254		MOUGINS - Sophia Antipolis 06254
	France		France
	Phone: +33 497 23 26 34		Phone: +33 497 23 26 34
	Email: pthubert@cisco.com		Email: pthubert@cisco.com
			Michael Richardson
			Sandelman Software Works
			Email: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
End of changes. 8 change blocks.
	26 lines changed or deleted		62 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/