1 / 14

draft-minaburo-lpwan-gap-analysis-00

draft-minaburo-lpwan-gap-analysis-00. Ana Minaburo Laurent Toutain. Outline. LPWAN Characteristics LPWAN at IETF IPv6, compression, fragmentation, management. LPWAN Characteristics. Constrained and challenged network (as defined RFC 7228). License-exempt or Licensed bands.

delorist
Télécharger la présentation

draft-minaburo-lpwan-gap-analysis-00

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. draft-minaburo-lpwan-gap-analysis-00 Ana Minaburo Laurent Toutain

  2. Outline LPWAN Characteristics LPWAN at IETF IPv6, compression, fragmentation, management

  3. LPWAN Characteristics Constrained and challenged network (as defined RFC 7228) License-exempt or Licensed bands Property industrial deployments, huge potential Battery powered devices with limited communications Deep Coverage LPWAN Technologies Asymmetric Lines Small message size Limit number of messages per device and per day Complex Device and Network management Acknowledgement management No IP capabilities

  4. Similar architecture: : Lorawan, NB-IoT, SIGFOX Join Server Home Subcriber Server Registration Authority End Device User Equipment End Point Gateway Evolved Node B Base Station Application Server Packet Data Node Gateway (Network Application) Network Server Serving-GW Service Center High density of nodes

  5. LPWAN at IETF • IP communication • Global connectivity (reachability) • Independence from L2 • Use or adapt actual protocols • Use existing addressing spaces and naming schemes • Strong Security • Adapted to the LP-WAN applications as: health, personal usages (water, gas, bus timing, etc.) • Scalability • High Reliability • Interoperability • Header Compression to reduce overhead

  6. IPv6 => LPWAN Impossible to send directly IPv6 packet, even with a fragmentation layer: • The overhead of IPv6 is not compatible with LPWAN • The variable MTU gives a variable fragmentation solution • Need to adapt NDP (Neighbor Discovery) to LPWAN

  7. 6Lowpan, 6lo => LPWAN • 6LoWPAN reduce header overhead for reliable L2 protocols • 6LoWPAN traditionallyusedforconstrainednodenetworks • The LPWAN technologies are evenmore constrainedthantypical6LoWPAN • Challengefor6LoWPAN mechanismsisthatLPWAN does not send ACK at L2 • 6Lo adapts 6LoWPAN for other technologies • In LP-WAN the network is also constrained • In LP-WAN devices are challenged • Best IPv6/UDP header compression: 6 Bytes (10% of a LoRaWAN frame) and 37 bytes with global @.

  8. Configuration • Neighbor Discovery • Decentralized configuration • 6LoWPAN ND uses unicast messages • Messages size: [draft-gomez-lpwan-ipv6-analysis-00] • -- Size of RS with SLLAO = 14 bytes • -- Size of RA with SLLAO, PIO and 6CO = 62 bytes • -- Size of NS with ARO and SLLAO = 46 bytes • -- Size of NA + ARO = 40 bytes

  9. RoHC • Define originally for IP/UDP/RTP streams • LPWAN traffic is not a stream => long convergence time • Bandwidth is extremely short to support IR packets (larger than a full header) • Allows unidirectional and bidirectional links • Extented to any protocol with RoHCv2 • Send full header, followed by field deltas • Impossible to send full headers in LPWAN • Manage by a Master SN • No Routable • Complex: Profiles, Operation Modes, Level of Compression, Compression Parameters, Header Formats, & Patents?

  10. 6TiSCH => LPWAN • Can be adapted to LPWAN • 6TiSCH use synchronization to performs determinism • 6tisch infrastructure is MESH • LPWAN does not have a slotted channel

  11. Routing => LP-WAN • LPWAN topology is a STAR • Not need routing for the moment • Future topologies could need an adaptation of a routing protocol

  12. CORE => LP-WAN • Adapt CORE solution to: • Duty cycle • Limited throughput • To use CoAP • No existing standard for CoAP compression

  13. IPv6 Architecture for LPWAN • Put the IETF components together • IPv6 • Security • Authentication • AAA • 6TiSCH • Header Compression • ND- Configuration • CoAP / CoMI-CoOL

  14. THANKS !!!Ana Minaburoana@ackl.io

More Related