Candidate Technologies for COMAN
draft-greevenbosch-coman-candidate-tech-02
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Bert Greevenbosch , Kepeng Li , Peter Van der Stok | ||
| Last updated | 2013-05-24 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-greevenbosch-coman-candidate-tech-02
coman B. Greevenbosch
Internet-Draft K. Li
Intended status: Informational Huawei Technologies
Expires: November 25, 2013 P. van der Stok
vanderstok consultancy
May 24, 2013
Candidate Technologies for COMAN
draft-greevenbosch-coman-candidate-tech-02
Abstract
This draft identifies candidate technologies and considerations for
the COMAN use cases and requirements.
Note
Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested, and should
be sent to coman@ietf.org.
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 November 25, 2013.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
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.
Table of Contents
1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Identified candidate technologies for the requirements . . . 3
3.1. OMA-LwM2M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. OMA Device Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2.1. OMA-DM Management Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2.2. ACL mechanism in OMA-DM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. CoAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.1. CoAP main specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3.2. CoAP capability discovery specifications . . . . . . 6
3.3.3. CoAP group communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3.4. CoAP energy saving technology . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3.5. Congestion avoidance in CoAP . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.4. Cryptography considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.5. MANET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.6. BACnet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.7. Other requirements and candidate technologies . . . . . . 12
4. High level requirements that need to be observed continuously 13
5. Table of requirements and related technologies . . . . . . . 14
6. Conclusion and recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
1. Requirements notation
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. Introduction
In [I-D.ersue-constrained-mgmt], several use cases and associated
requirements are defined for the management of constrained devices,
in a possibly constrained network.
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
This document identifies possible technologies associated with the
use cases and requirements.
In addition, this document includes several considerations associated
with the requirements, that are relevant for choosing proper
technologies.
The goal of this document is to identify what has been done, and what
still needs to be done. Especially, it aims at establishing a
clearer view of the scope and work in COMAN.
3. Identified candidate technologies for the requirements
3.1. OMA-LwM2M
OMA Lightweight M2M [OMA-LwM2M-TS] aims at providing an underlying
layer agnostic protocol to allow M2M service enablement and
management between the LwM2M Server and the LwM2M Client, which is
placed in the resource constrained devices. The first version of
enabler is currently being specified. The enabler provides a light
and compact protocol and a flat data structure, and can satisfy
various management requirements for constrained devices.
OMA-LwM2M has overlap with the following COMAN requirements:
o 4.2.002 Compact encoding of management data
o 4.4.001 Device status monitoring
o 4.4.002 Energy status monitoring
o 4.4.012 Logging
o 4.6.001 Authentication on management system and devices
o 4.6.002 Support suitable security bootstrapping mechanisms
o 4.6.003 Access control on management system and devices
Because of the overlap and early stage of OMA-LwM2M, good
coordination between COMAN and OMA-LwM2M is advisable.
3.2. OMA Device Management
OMA Device Management [OMA-DM] provides various functions for mobile
device management. OMA-DM specifies and depends heavily on the
SyncML language, which uses XML. The typical underlying transport
protocol is HTTP. This makes OMA-DM in unaltered form infeasible for
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
constrained devices. Especially, it violates the following
requirements:
o 4.1.001 Support multiple device classes within a single network
o 4.2.002 Compact encoding of management data
Nevertheless, there is much overlap between OMA-DM functionality and
COMAN requirements. As such, OMA-DM MAY be used as inspiration for
the COMAN solution.
OMA-DM defines a general data model for management purpose, which is
called a Management Object (MO). MOs are stored on the device and
can be manipulated by management actions carried over the OMA-DM
protocol. For each management purpose, a specific MO has been
defined. MOs relevant to the COMAN requirements include "FUMO" for
firmware update requirements, "DiagMon MO" for diagnostic and
monitoring requirements and the "Scheduling MO" for scheduling
requirements. The various MOs are discussed in Section 3.2.1 and its
subsections.
Apart from requirements covered by MOs, the following COMAN
requirements intersect with the general OMA-DM functionality:
o 4.1.007 Network-wide configuration - Use broadcast capability from
OMA-DM 1.3 - Sessionless specification.
3.2.1. OMA-DM Management Objects
3.2.1.1. OMA DiagMon MO
OMA DiagMon MO builds on and leverages the OMA DM v1.x protocol. It
provides standard DM Management Objects and associated client-side
and server-side behaviour necessary to conduct diagnostics and
monitoring activities on mobile devices.
Requirements related to OMA DiagMon MO:
o 4.4.003 Monitoring of current and estimated device availability:
can be achieved by DiagMon functions MO.
o 4.4.004 Network status monitoring: can be achieved by DiagMon
functions MO.
o 4.4.006 Performance monitoring: can be achieved by DiagMon
functions MO.
o 4.4.007 Fault detection monitoring: can be achieved by Trap MO.
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o 4.4.011 Notifications: can be achieved by reporting functions in
DiagMon MO.
o 4.4.008 Passive and reactive monitoring: can be achieved by Trap
MO.
o 4.5.001 Self-management - Self-Healing: device events can be
captured by Trap MO, also periodically, to achieve self-
management.
3.2.1.2. OMA Scheduling MO
The OMA-DM Scheduling MO enabler [OMA-Scheduling-MO] specifies the
scheduling framework as well as its Management Objects that can be
layered on top of OMA-DM v1.x, to seamlessly add the common
scheduling capability to the OMA-DM based management infrastructure.
With this capability, the OMA-DM system is able to schedule
management operations on the device, and have them executed offline
when the schedule - time-based or event-based - matches.
Requirements related to OMA Scheduling MO:
o 4.5.001 Self-management - Self-Healing: time-based scheduled task
can achieve periodic self-management.
3.2.1.3. OMA-FUMO
OMA-FUMO provides information on management objects associated with
firmware updates in OMA-DM based mobile devices and the behaviour
associated with the processing of the management objects.
3.2.2. ACL mechanism in OMA-DM
OMA-DM [OMA-DM] defines the Access Control List (ACL) mechanism to
control the access to the Management Objects. ACL is a property
associated with the Management Object nodes, and is used to grant
access permissions to the server identifiers.
Related requirements:
o 4.6.002 Support suitable security bootstrapping mechanisms
o 4.6.003 Access control on management system and devices
3.3. CoAP
The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) [I-D.ietf-core-coap] is
defined by the IETF. It provides an application layer protocol
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
especially designed for constrained devices. It is binary and easy
to parse.
CoAP is especially suitable on top of IPv6 and UDP. However, other
lower level protocols are possible too.
In addition, several drafts have been specified to target specific
issues.
3.3.1. CoAP main specification
The following requirements are met by the CoAP main specification:
o 4.1.001 Support multiple device classes within a single network -
the low complexity of CoAP allows usage in all device classes.
o 4.1.004 Minimise state maintained on constrained devices - CoAP
has been designed to keep servers stateless.
o 4.1.006 Support for lossy links and unreliable devices - through
the CoAP CON retransmission mechanism.
o 4.2.004 Mapping of management protocol interactions - CoAP
provides HTTP/Coap Mapping.
o 4.2.007 Protocol extensibility - mainly provided by options
mechanism.
o 4.3.003 Asynchronous transaction support - CoAP supports separate
response and piggy-backed response.
o 4.4.007 Fault detection monitoring (partly) - CoAP pinging allows
verification if a device is online.
3.3.2. CoAP capability discovery specifications
Various CoAP drafts cover different aspects of capability discovery.
o RFC 6690 [RFC6690] defines a link format, which provides
information on resources a server is offering.
o The draft [I-D.greevenbosch-core-profile-description] allows
signalling a CoAP server profile.
o The draft [I-D.shelby-core-resource-directory] allows acquiring
information about resources from another server, called the
"Resource Directory".
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o The draft [I-D.lynn-core-discovery-mapping] provides a mapping
between the resource directory and a DNS lookup. This allows
usage of DNS lookup for the discovery of CoAP servers.
o The informational draft [I-D.vanderstok-core-dna] discusses
mapping between IP address and a Fully Qualified Domain Name
(FQDN), proposing DNS for lookup of the IP address. In addition,
it discusses possible naming conventions, group communication and
resource discovery. Towards the latter, registration of new
devices to the resource directory is discussed.
Related COMAN requirement:
o 4.3.002 Capability discovery
3.3.3. CoAP group communication
The informational CoAP group communication draft
[I-D.ietf-core-groupcomm] discusses various aspects of group
communication through IP multicast [RFC4604] in CoAP.
Another informational draft discussing group communication is
[I-D.vanderstok-core-dna]. This draft gives detailed examples, and
discusses multicast, naming and DNS mapping of groups.
Related COMAN requirement:
o 4.8.001 Group-based provisioning
3.3.4. CoAP energy saving technology
The draft [I-D.rahman-core-sleepy] provides a mechanisms for sleepy
devices. These mechanisms include informing an intermediate resource
directory (defined in [I-D.shelby-core-resource-directory]) of its
waking up or intent to fall asleep. Through these two drafts,
clients can use the observe mechanism [I-D.ietf-core-observe] to be
informed of whether a device is sleeping or active.
Related COMAN requirements:
o 4.1.006 Support for lossy links and unreachable devices
o 4.7.002 Support of energy-optimized communication protocols
3.3.5. Congestion avoidance in CoAP
The considerations in this section relate to:
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o 4.9.001 Congestion avoidance
o 4.9.003 Traffic delay schemes
The draft [I-D.bormann-core-cocoa] provides general background
information about CoAP congestion control, and its challenges.
The draft [I-D.li-core-conditional-observe] defines a mechanism to
signal minimum time between CoAP observations.
The draft [I-D.greevenbosch-core-minimum-request-interval] defines a
mechanism to restrict the speed in which a CoAP client sends requests
to the CoAP server.
Other ways to delay the traffic in CoAP is by sending delayed ACKs.
However, this has limitations as too much delay will lead to
retransmits from the client side. In addition, this method requires
the server to maintain bookkeeping of the delayed ACKs.
3.4. Cryptography considerations
4.6.001 Authentication of management system and devices
o The raw public key as defined in [I-D.ietf-tls-oob-pubkey] can be
used for establishing security and authentication.
o OCSP-lite as defined in [I-D.greevenbosch-tls-ocsp-lite] can be
used for revocation checking of the raw public key.
4.6.002 Support suitable security bootstrapping mechanisms
o The draft [I-D.jennings-core-transitive-trust-enrollment]
describes a system in which a Device is introduced to a Controller
by a Introducer. In this draft, it is suggested that the Device
symmetric key is coded as a QR code on the box, which can be read
by the Controller, which may be a mobile phone with internet
access.
4.6.004 Select cryptographic algorithms that are efficient in both
code space and execution time
o Candidates for asymmetric cryptography:
* RSA
* ECC
Keysize TBD.
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o Candidates for symmetric cryptography:
* AES (keysize 128/192/256)
Keysize TBD.
o Candidates for hashing:
* SHA-1
* SHA-256
* SHA-512
4.6.008 Select cryptographic algorithms that are to be supported in
hardware
o TBD
3.5. MANET
TBD.
3.6. BACnet
BACnet exists under the auspices of the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). BACnet is an
American national standard, a European standard, a national standard
in more than 30 countries, and an ISO global standard. The protocol
is supported and maintained by ASHRAE Standing Standard Project
Committee (SSPC) 135. BACnet is the most deployed communications
standard for building control in the USA. It consists of a number of
working groups. Their results are published in one BACnet
specification document: International ISO standard 16484-5
[ISO16484-5]. It defines a network architecture on top of several
PHYs (ARCnet, MS/TP, Ethernet, P2P, LONTalk) and IP. It specifies a
number of object types from which a control system can be composed.
Central is the device objects (unique per device) that maintains all
organization information for a given devices. Object types are
defined for scheduling, grouping, alarm handling, object and device
management, and service discovery. The BACnet specification includes
an extensive Alarm and Event service, and object access service for
system configuration purposes, and remote device management services.
The following requirements are met by the BACnet specification:
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o 4.1.001 Support multiple device classes within a single network -
the BACnet standard has an open source implementation that fits on
the smallest devices and can also be deployed on larger devices
o 4.1.002 Management scalability - the BACnet standard defines a
hierarchical management structure where data are collected from
all devices with support from information in the device object.
Group objects can be defined which aggregate information from
multiple objects within the same device. A working group, BACnet/
WS, is dedicated to defining the architecture for storing
historical data of the control system in a central repository
using the ATOM Publishing standard and exploiting the xml modeling
facilities.
o 4.1.003 Hierarchical management - hierarchical management is
supported by the device and object structure, the independent
structure in alarm management, and the group object which supports
the grouping of commands.
o 4.1.004 Minimize state maintained on constrained devices - state
is minimized by selecting relevant objects in the control devices.
o 4.1.008 Distributed Management - BACnet does provide the
possibility to export management to multiple managers, however, no
atomic write and read is specified, although there is a
transaction concept at network level.
o 4.2.001 Modular implementation of management protocols - BACnet
encourages and prescribes a modular implementation by segmenting
the management functions and distributing them over different
objects.
o 4.2.002 Compact encoding of management data - BACnet transports
binary data encoded according to ASN.1, reduces storage space as
much as feasible given the specified functionality.
o 4.2.005 Consistency of data models with the underlying information
model - BACnet has an information model based on the ATOM
publishing protocol. The BACnet Annex N standard prescribes the
mapping between the information model and the data model present
in the nodes.
o 4.2.007 Protocol extensibility - the BACnet model encourages
extensibility, as proven by the constant backwards compatible
standards updates. The standards extension process is slow and
sets the extension pace.
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o 4.3.001 Self-configuration capability - BACnet supports discovery
of devices, their objects and properties via WHO-HAS, I-AM and
similar messages.
o 4.3.002 Capability Discovery - See 4.3.001.
o 4.3.004 Network reconfiguration - BACnet knows the concept of
BACnet routers. Routers declare themselves to network segments,
and can be allocated started, stopped. No automatic procedures
are described for full auto-configuration.
o 4.4.001 Device status monitoring - BACnet provides extensive tools
for network and device status monitoring, specified in the Alarm
and Event services section. BACnet supports a very flexible event
and alarm reporting. Clients can subscribe to generators of
events and alarms, which can be changes of values in objects or
status changes. Classes of events can be specified with
appropriate handling by the clients.
o 4.4.002 Energy status monitoring - This can be provided in BACnet
by creating a binary value object type connected to the energy
c.q. power attributes to monitor and specify a change of state
with an appropriate client.
o 4.4.003 Monitoring of current and estimated device availability -
See text in 4.4.002.
o 4.4.004 Network status monitoring - BACnet provides facilities to
configure and install routers on the BACnet network. BACnet
specifies the MS/TP and PTP link protocols with the possibility to
monitor link status.
o 4.4.006 Performance Monitoring - BACnet defines a set of
application layer objects. Dependent on their function,
performance measures are monitored and events or alarms are
generated to be monitored by an alarm handling service.
o 4.4.007 Fault detection monitoring - BACnet includes fault
detection monitoring at network level.
o 4.4.009 Recovery - BACnet provides functions for network recovery
and object, device recovery without specifying how these functions
must be used in case of given errors.
o 4.4.010 Network topology discovery - this is a rather basic
capability of a BACnet network.
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o 4.4.011 Notifications - the BACnet alarm and event services are
dedicated to this topic.
o 4.4.012 Logging - BACnet annex N specifies how logged values can
be stored in a server using the ATOM publishing protocol.
o 4.6.001 Authentication of management system and devices - BACnet
security service provides authentication of peers, operators and
data source.
o 4.10.002 Reliable unicast transport - BACnet provides a
transaction service over the network.
o 4.10.003 Best-effort multicast - BACnet goes to great pains to
provide a broadcast facility which is essential for its
configuration purposes.
o 4.11.001 Avoid complex application layer transactions requiring
large application messages - BACnet has a finite set of
application message constructs in which application messages
should fit.
o 4.11.002 Avoid reassembly of messages at multiple layers in the
protocol stack - BACnet avoids reassembly by contruction.
3.7. Other requirements and candidate technologies
4.1.005 Automatic re-synchronisation with eventual consistency
4.1.006 Support for lossy links and unreachable devices
o Mechanisms for devices that are not sleepy, but have unstable
network connections (e.g. mobile devices) are needed.
4.1.008 Distributed management
4.2.006 Loss-less mapping of management data models
4.3.002 Capability discovery
4.3.004 Network reconfiguration
4.4.009 Recovery
4.4.010 Network topology discovery
4.7.001 Management of energy resources
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
4.7.002 Support of energy-optimized communication protocols
o 6LoWPAN [RFC4944] provides IPv6 functionality for IEEE 802.15.4
networks.
4.7.003 Support for layer 2 energy-aware protocols
o IEEE 802.15.4 [IEEE-802.15.4] provides wireless low power
communication on short distance.
4.7.004 Dying gasp
4.9.002 Redirect traffic
4.10.001 Scalable transport layer
4.10.002 Reliable unicast transport
4.10.004 Secure message transport
4.11.001 Avoid complex application layer transactions requiring large
application layer messages
4.11.002 Avoid reassembly of messages at multiple layers in the
protocol stack
4. High level requirements that need to be observed continuously
4.1.001 Support multiple device classes within a single network
4.1.002 Management scalability
4.1.004 Minimise state maintained on constrained devices
4.1.006 Support for lossy links and unreachable devices
4.2.002 Compact encoding of management data
o A binary format would be most compact.
o TLV could be considered.
o XML would be counter productive.
o JSON may be counter productive.
4.2.003 Compression of management data or complete messages
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
o When the messages are designed compact enough, compression will be
unnecessary.
4.2.007 Protocol extensibility
5. Table of requirements and related technologies
The Table 1 summarises the requirements and related or possible
candidate technologies.
+-----------+----------------+--------------------------------------+
| Requireme | Name | Associated technology |
| nt number | | |
+-----------+----------------+--------------------------------------+
| 4.1.001 | Support | [I-D.ietf-core-coap], [ISO16484-5] |
| | multiple | |
| | device classes | |
| | within a | |
| | single network | |
| | | |
| 4.1.002 | Management | [ISO16484-5] |
| | scalability | |
| | | |
| 4.1.003 | Hierarchical | [ISO16484-5] |
| | management | |
| | | |
| 4.1.004 | Minimise state | [I-D.ietf-core-coap], [ISO16484-5] |
| | maintained on | |
| | constrained | |
| | devices | |
| | | |
| 4.1.005 | Automatic re-s | |
| | ynchronisation | |
| | with eventual | |
| | consistency | |
| | | |
| 4.1.006 | Support for | [I-D.ietf-core-coap] [I-D.rahman- |
| | lossy links | core-sleepy], [I-D.shelby-core- |
| | and | resource-directory], [I-D.ietf-core- |
| | unreachable | observe] |
| | devices | |
| | | |
| 4.1.007 | Network-wide | [OMA-DM], [ISO16484-5] |
| | configuration | |
| | | |
| 4.1.008 | Distributed | [ISO16484-5] |
| | management | |
| | | |
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
| 4.2.001 | Modular | [ISO16484-5] |
| | implementation | |
| | of management | |
| | protocols | |
| | | |
| 4.2.002 | Compact | [OMA-LwM2M-TS], [ISO16484-5] |
| | encoding of | |
| | management | |
| | data | |
| | | |
| 4.2.003 | Compression of | |
| | management | |
| | data or | |
| | complete | |
| | messages | |
| | | |
| 4.2.004 | Mapping of | [I-D.ietf-core-coap] |
| | management | |
| | protocol | |
| | interactions | |
| | | |
| 4.2.005 | Consistency of | [ISO16484-5] |
| | data models | |
| | with the | |
| | underlying | |
| | information | |
| | model | |
| | | |
| 4.2.006 | Loss-less | |
| | mapping of | |
| | management | |
| | data models | |
| | | |
| 4.2.007 | Protocol | [I-D.ietf-core-coap], [ISO16484-5] |
| | extensibility | |
| | | |
| 4.3.001 | Self- | [ISO16484-5] |
| | configuration | |
| | capability | |
| | | |
| 4.3.002 | Capability | [RFC6690], [I-D.greevenbosch-core- |
| | discovery | profile-description], [I-D.shelby- |
| | | core-resource-directory], [I-D.lynn- |
| | | core-discovery-mapping], [I-D |
| | | .vanderstok-core-dna], [ISO16484-5] |
| | | |
| 4.3.003 | Asynchronous | [I-D.ietf-core-coap] |
| | transaction | |
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
| | support | |
| | | |
| 4.3.004 | Network reconf | [ISO16484-5] |
| | iguration | |
| | | |
| 4.4.001 | Device status | [OMA-LwM2M-TS], [ISO16484-5] |
| | monitoring | |
| | | |
| 4.4.002 | Energy status | [OMA-LwM2M-TS], [ISO16484-5] |
| | monitoring | |
| | | |
| 4.4.003 | Monitoring of | [OMA-DiagMon-MO], [ISO16484-5] |
| | current and | |
| | estimated | |
| | device | |
| | availability | |
| | | |
| 4.4.004 | Network status | [OMA-DiagMon-MO], [ISO16484-5] |
| | monitoring | |
| | | |
| 4.4.005 | Self- | [OMA-DiagMon-MO], [ISO16484-5] |
| | monitoring | |
| | | |
| 4.4.006 | Performance | [OMA-DiagMon-MO], [ISO16484-5] |
| | monitoring | |
| | | |
| 4.4.007 | Fault | [I-D.ietf-core-coap], [OMA-DiagMon- |
| | detection | MO], [ISO16484-5] |
| | monitoring | |
| | | |
| 4.4.008 | Passive and | [OMA-DiagMon-MO] |
| | reactive | |
| | monitoring | |
| | | |
| 4.4.009 | Recovery | [ISO16484-5] |
| | | |
| 4.4.010 | Network | [ISO16484-5] |
| | topology | |
| | discovery | |
| | | |
| 4.4.011 | Notifications | [OMA-DiagMon-MO], [ISO16484-5] |
| | | |
| 4.4.012 | Logging | [OMA-LwM2M-TS], [ISO16484-5] |
| | | |
| 4.5.001 | Self- | [OMA-DiagMon-MO], [OMA-Scheduling- |
| | management - | MO] |
| | Self-healing | |
| | | |
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
| 4.6.001 | Authentication | [OMA-LwM2M-TS], [I-D.ietf-tls-oob- |
| | of management | pubkey], [I-D.greevenbosch-tls-ocsp- |
| | system and | lite], [ISO16484-5] |
| | devices | |
| | | |
| 4.6.002 | Support | [OMA-LwM2M-TS], [OMA-DM], [I-D |
| | suitable | .jennings-core-transitive-trust- |
| | security | enrollment] |
| | bootstrapping | |
| | mechanisms | |
| | | |
| 4.6.003 | Access control | [OMA-LwM2M-TS], [OMA-DM] |
| | on management | |
| | system and | |
| | devices | |
| | | |
| 4.6.004 | Select | |
| | cryptographic | |
| | algorithms | |
| | that are | |
| | efficient in | |
| | both code | |
| | space and | |
| | execution time | |
| | | |
| 4.7.001 | Management of | [IEEE-802.15.4], [I-D.rahman-core- |
| | energy | sleepy], |
| | resources | |
| | | |
| 4.7.002 | Support of | [I-D.ietf-core-coap], [RFC4944], |
| | energy- | [I-D.rahman-core-sleepy], [I-D.ietf- |
| | optimized | core-observe], [I-D.shelby-core- |
| | communication | resource-directory] |
| | protocols | |
| | | |
| 4.7.003 | Support for | [IEEE-802.15.4] |
| | layer 2 | |
| | energy-aware | |
| | protocols | |
| | | |
| 4.7.004 | Dying gasp | |
| | | |
| 4.8.001 | Group-based | [I-D.ietf-core-groupcomm], [I-D |
| | provisioning | .vanderstok-core-dna], [RFC4604] |
| | | |
| 4.9.001 | Congestion | [I-D.ietf-core-coap], [I-D.li-core- |
| | avoidance | conditional-observe], [I-D.bormann- |
| | | core-cocoa], [I-D.greevenbosch-core- |
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
| | | minimum-request-interval] |
| | | |
| 4.9.002 | Redirect | |
| | traffic | |
| | | |
| 4.9.003 | Traffic delay | [I-D.ietf-core-coap], [I-D.li-core- |
| | schemes | conditional-observe], [I-D.bormann- |
| | | core-cocoa], [I-D.greevenbosch-core- |
| | | minimum-request-interval] |
| | | |
| 4.10.001 | Scalable | |
| | transport | |
| | layer | |
| | | |
| 4.10.002 | Reliable | |
| | unicast | |
| | transport | |
| | | |
| 4.10.003 | Best-effort | [ISO16484-5] |
| | multicast | |
| | | |
| 4.10.004 | Secure message | |
| | transport | |
| | | |
| 4.11.001 | Avoid complex | |
| | application | |
| | layer | |
| | transactions | |
| | requiring | |
| | large | |
| | application | |
| | layer messages | |
| | | |
| 4.11.002 | Avoid | [ISO16484-5] |
| | reassembly of | |
| | messages at | |
| | multiple | |
| | layers in the | |
| | protocol stack | |
+-----------+----------------+--------------------------------------+
Table 1: Requirements and technologies
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
6. Conclusion and recommendations
In this document, we have identified technology standards that
currently cover many of the COMAN use cases. COMAN should consider
referencing these technologies when appropriate. In addition, this
document points at technologies that are not deployed in a standard,
and hence need new standardisation. We recommend to write a document
in COMAN that describes the overall envisaged management system and
suggests standardisation topics for IETF.
7. Security Considerations
TBD
8. IANA considerations
TBD
9. Change Log
v00 -> v01:
o Added text about BACnet.
v01 -> v02:
o Updated text about BACnet.
o Updated to match new requirements numbering in I-D.ersue-
constrained-mgmt v04.
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC4604] Holbrook, H., Cain, B., and B. Haberman, "Using Internet
Group Management Protocol Version 3 (IGMPv3) and Multicast
Listener Discovery Protocol Version 2 (MLDv2) for Source-
Specific Multicast", RFC 4604, August 2006.
[RFC4944] Montenegro, G., Kushalnagar, N., Hui, J., and D. Culler,
"Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4
Networks", RFC 4944, September 2007.
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
[RFC6130] Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., and J. Dean, "Mobile Ad Hoc
Network (MANET) Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)",
RFC 6130, April 2011.
[RFC6690] Shelby, Z., "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Link
Format", RFC 6690, August 2012.
[I-D.ietf-core-coap]
Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and C. Bormann, "Constrained
Application Protocol (CoAP)", draft-ietf-core-coap-16
(work in progress), May 2013.
[I-D.ietf-core-groupcomm]
Rahman, A. and E. Dijk, "Group Communication for CoAP",
draft-ietf-core-groupcomm-07 (work in progress), May 2013.
[I-D.ietf-core-observe]
Hartke, K., "Observing Resources in CoAP", draft-ietf-
core-observe-08 (work in progress), February 2013.
[I-D.ietf-tls-oob-pubkey]
Wouters, P., Tschofenig, H., Gilmore, J., Weiler, S., and
T. Kivinen, "Out-of-Band Public Key Validation for
Transport Layer Security (TLS)", draft-ietf-tls-oob-
pubkey-07 (work in progress), February 2013.
[I-D.bormann-core-cocoa]
Bormann, C., "CoAP Simple Congestion Control/Advanced",
draft-bormann-core-cocoa-00 (work in progress), August
2012.
[I-D.ersue-constrained-mgmt]
Ersue, M., Romascanu, D., and J. Schoenwaelder,
"Management of Networks with Constrained Devices: Problem
Statement, Use Cases and Requirements", draft-ersue-
constrained-mgmt-03 (work in progress), February 2013.
[I-D.greevenbosch-core-minimum-request-interval]
Greevenbosch, B., "CoAP Minimum Request Interval", draft-
greevenbosch-core-minimum-request-interval-01 (work in
progress), April 2013.
[I-D.greevenbosch-core-profile-description]
Greevenbosch, B., Hoebeke, J., and I. Ishaq, "CoAP Profile
Description Format", draft-greevenbosch-core-profile-
description-01 (work in progress), October 2012.
[I-D.greevenbosch-tls-ocsp-lite]
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
Greevenbosch, B., "OCSP-lite - Revocation of raw public
keys", draft-greevenbosch-tls-ocsp-lite-00 (work in
progress), December 2012.
[I-D.jennings-core-transitive-trust-enrollment]
Jennings, C., "Transitive Trust Enrollment for Constrained
Devices", draft-jennings-core-transitive-trust-
enrollment-01 (work in progress), October 2012.
[I-D.li-core-conditional-observe]
Li, S., Hoebeke, J., and A. Jara, "Conditional observe in
CoAP", draft-li-core-conditional-observe-03 (work in
progress), October 2012.
[I-D.lynn-core-discovery-mapping]
Lynn, K. and Z. Shelby, "CoRE Link-Format to DNS-Based
Service Discovery Mapping", draft-lynn-core-discovery-
mapping-02 (work in progress), October 2012.
[I-D.rahman-core-sleepy]
Rahman, A., "Enhanced Sleepy Node Support for CoAP",
draft-rahman-core-sleepy-02 (work in progress), February
2013.
[I-D.shelby-core-resource-directory]
Shelby, Z., Krco, S., and C. Bormann, "CoRE Resource
Directory", draft-shelby-core-resource-directory-05 (work
in progress), February 2013.
[I-D.vanderstok-core-dna]
Stok, P., Lynn, K., and A. Brandt, "CoRE Discovery,
Naming, and Addressing", draft-vanderstok-core-dna-02
(work in progress), July 2012.
[IEEE-802.15.4]
IEEE Computer Society, , "IEEE std. 802.15.4-2003",
October 2003.
[ISO16484-5]
, "Building automation and control systems -- Part 5: Data
communication protocol", ISO 16484-5, 2012.
[OMA-DM] , "OMA Device Management 1.3", OMA-ERP-DM-V1_3-20121213-C
, December 2012.
[OMA-DiagMon-MO]
, "OMA Diagnostics and Monitoring Management Object", OMA-
ERP-DiagMon-V1_0-20120313-A , March 2012.
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft COMAN - Candidate Technologies May 2013
[OMA-FUMO]
, "Firmware Update Management Object", OMA-TS-DM-FUMO-
V1_0-20070209-A , February 2007.
[OMA-Scheduling-MO]
, "OMA DM Scheduling Management Object", OMA-ERP-
DM_Scheduling-V1_0-20110614-C , June 2011.
[OMA-LwM2M-TS]
, "OMA Lightweight M2M", OMA-TS-LightweightM2M-
V1_0-20130123-D (work in progress), January 2013.
Authors' Addresses
Bert Greevenbosch
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Huawei Industrial Base
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129
P.R. China
Phone: +86-755-28979133
Email: bert.greevenbosch@huawei.com
Kepeng Li
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Huawei Industrial Base
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129
P.R. China
Phone: +86-755-28971807
Email: likepeng@huawei.com
Peter van der Stok
vanderstok consultancy
Phone: +31-492474673 (Netherlands), +33-966015248 (France)
Email: consultancy@vanderstok.org
URI: www.vanderstok.org
Greevenbosch, et al. Expires November 25, 2013 [Page 22]