[Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter

Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com> Tue, 21 June 2016 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0429C12DA57 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wAd77APVBIru for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:27:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x234.google.com (mail-vk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D71D712D533 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x234.google.com with SMTP id d185so27401093vkg.0 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uHfXWcwficuRndEjwoHGTH5feqgqj3OWXDURof/b5HI=; b=O76LBm02TKCoZMnf8NIRGJQ1ILEu4WtbFqDWb7crFa58I7KulGW1/ksLdRuQxQn/w0 YOlh5UurpeVBtW7DnpSAGULnGZMvFeHELveQAo1raelFc0d3DJ1obP7WGlJOL0WQqriq QaPKcXGknHN+CRVvpFJdPOgYcxdLUDJp7ay7IpxUCXb9UMoPaNZSZPYOET7/IcKsSbDv agI3s3F2oEm3MHhqu5qXmfdYAyBwNwXe/OWPlpfT1iZ3z+77FgI2tvRTbvUSrzNm9L83 cKZtcV5bwYKER4HhLvn0oH87DyFD7UnZhOylN14OMfXGGMJ8SYOjuAeaE1EypVZfkrw7 gS2w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uHfXWcwficuRndEjwoHGTH5feqgqj3OWXDURof/b5HI=; b=Z6UPlxBoWfUOk2IK5T51+PBw6NRv2ASnw9hrqSgRuwOZE1EfTnoNI7DWDw0I8MnGyI HxhMK7/hS4hW9ff2o2olyGQtErqRjKw92zYnASWVpEsazPGzLcZorCNbMbBnQRhyyoMU fboVdqZ4mX6/at7iSwkm9/UHMlGrdngmFfWrrkjQblxCE3LK0yA8J1y5sqWCUCJnzX6f H27z8wK8kJM956qavtiCmkveNRb6/z8+TgX9/9c1pn/3G9orltDXQW/D0MXwY03RnRCT 9q/WPIXnBzOnbqrnTA5piKLcRCm1OWs5Gv/SaGO+MoO2KZUS7+3BC4LqVbIdGejt2GnS c1vA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJHQB1jdcDy1TgCXAZ4hBtd+VAupHonjW6OAhO+DMUq3J0ldIma8/5OvFKcpClKNNaSOKIcTM94V1CLKg==
X-Received: by 10.176.0.87 with SMTP id 81mr9707576uai.28.1466526436875; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.159.36.200 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 19:27:16 +0300
Message-ID: <CAP+sJUdRQHJhuszRLmMLoObVVELTGKAboPZpjHRV1M1t3T1BpA@mail.gmail.com>
To: roll <roll@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113d0ad452e58a0535cc4b50
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/41SwWx5dlHHq2JEnYw_k-oXwFP0>
Cc: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
Subject: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 16:27:33 -0000

Dear all,

Please find a draft of the working group charter.

Please review and comments. It would be good to have your comments before
IETF 96.

Thank you very much in advance,

Peter and Ines

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Charter for Working Group

Low power and Lossy Networks (LLNs) are made up of many embedded devices
with limited power, memory, and processing resources. They are
interconnected by a variety of links, such as IEEE 802.15.4, Bluetooth, Low
Power WiFi, wired or other low power PLC (Powerline Communication) links.
LLNs are transitioning to an end-to-end IP-based solution to avoid the
problem of non-interoperable networks interconnected by protocol
translation gateways and proxies.

Generally speaking, LLNs are characterized as follows, but not limited to:

-LLNs operate with a hard, very small bound on state.

-In most cases, LLN optimize for saving energy by using small packet
headers and few reduce amount of control packets.

-Typical traffic patterns are not simply unicast flows (e.g. in some cases
most if not all traffic can be point to multipoint).

- In most cases, LLNs will be employed over link layers with restricted
frame-sizes and low bit rates, thus a routing protocol for LLNs should be
specifically adapted for such link layers.

- LLN routing protocols have to be very careful when trading off efficiency
for generality; since LLN nodes do not have resources to waste.


These specific properties cause LLNs to have specific routing requirements.

Existing routing protocols such as OSPF, IS-IS, AODV, and OLSR have been
evaluated by the working group (draft-levis-roll-overview-protocols-00) and
have in their current form been found to not satisfy all of these specific
routing requirements “Routing Requirements for Urban Low-Power and Lossy
Networks” RFC 5548, “Industrial Routing Requirements in Low-Power and Lossy
Networks” RFC 5673, “Home Automation Routing Requirements in Low-Power and
Lossy Networks” RFC 5826, Building Automation Routing Requirements in
Low-Power and Lossy Networks RFC 5867.

The Working Group is focused on routing issues for LLN and maintaining the
protocols developed by the working group.

There is a wide scope of application areas for LLNs, including industrial
monitoring, building automation (HVAC, lighting, access control, fire),
connected homes, health care, environmental monitoring, urban sensor
networks (e.g. Smart Grid), asset tracking. The Working Group focuses on
routing solutions for a subset of these: connected home, building and urban
sensor networks for which routing requirements have been specified. These
application-specific routing requirement documents were used for protocol
design.
The Working Group focuses on IPv6 routing architectural framework for these
application scenarios. The Framework will take into consideration various
aspects including high reliability in the presence of time varying loss
characteristics and connectivity while permitting low-power operation with
very modest memory and CPU pressure in networks potentially comprising a
very large number (several thousands) of nodes.

The Working Group will document how data packets are routed and
encapsulated when they cross the LLN, and when they enter and exit the LLN:
the appropriate use of RH3 (RFC6553), RPI (RFC6554) and IPv6-in-IPv6
encapsulation including how routing loops are detected. In consultation
with the 6lo WG, the Working Group will design a method to compress these
routing headers into a single block. The WGLC on this work will be shared
with 6lo. The Working group will align with the 6man WG when needed.
ROLL is responsible for maintenance of the protocols that is has developed,
including RPL and MPL. AD approval is required for each new work item that
is proposed.

Work Items are:

- Guidance in using RFC6553, RFC6554, and IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation.

- Compression of  RFC6553, RFC6554, and IP headers in the 6LoWPAN
adaptation layer context

- Additional protocol to  reduce paths for RPL in non-storing mode

- Automatic selection of MPL forwarders to reduce message replication

- Data models for RPL and MPL management

- Alternative Multicast algorithm based on Bier forwarding.

- Solution  of  the  problems associated with the use of No- Path DAO
messaging in RPL.

- Methods to improve the current RPL behaviour, e.g. DIS modifications in
RPL.


Milestones                                        DATE

Recharter WG or close                   September 2017

Initial submission of draft about YANG RPL model to IESG   March 2017

Initial submission of draft about MPL selection to IESG    January 2017

Initial submission of draft about Bier Multicast to IESG      November 2016

Submit draft about YANG MPL model to IESG     October 2016

Initial Submission of the draft about when to use RFC6553, RFC6554, and
IPv6-in-IPv6 encapsulation     August 2016
Draft-ietf-roll-useofrplinfo to the IESG.

Initial submission of the draft about how to compress RFC6553, RFC6554, and
IP headers in the 6LoWPAN adaptation layer context.  to the IESG.    May
2016
draft-ietf-roll-routing-dispatch

Initial Submission of the No-Path DAO Problem Statement to the IESG
November 2016



/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////