lpwan Working Group JC. Zuniga Internet-Draft SIGFOX Intended status: Informational C. Gomez Expires: November 16, 2020 Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya L. Toutain IMT-Atlantique May 15, 2020 SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-02 Abstract The Generic Framework for Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation (SCHC) specification describes both, an application header compression scheme, and a frame fragmentation and loss recovery functionality for Low Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies. SCHC offers a great level of flexibility that can be tailored for different LPWAN technologies. The present document provides the optimal parameters and modes of operation when SCHC is implemented over a Sigfox LPWAN. This set of parameters are also known as a "SCHC over Sigfox profile." 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 https://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 16, 2020. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 1] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. SCHC: Generic Framework for Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. SCHC over Sigfox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.1. Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.2. Uplink . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.3. Downlink . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.4. SCHC Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.5. Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.5.1. Uplink Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.5.2. Downlink Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.6. Padding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1. Introduction The Generic Framework for Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation (SCHC) specification [RFC8724] defines both, a higher layer header compression scheme and a fragmentation and loss recovery functionality. Both can be used on top of all the LWPAN systems defined in [RFC8376] . These LPWAN systems have similar characteristics such as star-oriented topologies, network architecture, connected devices with built-in applications, etc. SCHC offers a great level of flexibility to accommodate all these LPWAN systems. Even though there are a great number of similarities between LPWAN technologies, some differences exist with respect to the transmission characteristics, payload sizes, etc. Hence, there are optimal parameters and modes of operation that can be used when SCHC is used on top of a specific LPWAN. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 2] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 This document describes the recommended parameters, settings and modes of operation to be used when SCHC is implemented over a Sigfox LPWAN. This set of parameters are also known as a "SCHC over Sigfox profile." 2. Terminology It is assumed that the reader is familiar with the terms and mechanisms defined in [RFC8376] and in [RFC8724]. 3. SCHC: Generic Framework for Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation The Generic Framework for Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation (SCHC) described in [RFC8724] takes advantage of the predictability of data flows existing in LPWAN networks to avoid context synchronization. Contexts must be stored and pre-configured on both ends. This can be done either by using a provisioning protocol, by out of band means, or by pre-provisioning them (e.g. at manufacturing time). The way contexts are configured and stored on both ends is out of the scope of this document. 4. SCHC over Sigfox 4.1. Network Architecture Figure 1 represents the architecture for compression/decompression (C/D) and fragmentation/reassembly (F/R) based on the terminology defined in [RFC8376], where the Radio Gateway (RG) is a Sigfox Base Station and the Network Gateway (NGW) is the Sigfox cloud-based Network. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 3] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 Device Application +----------------+ +--------------+ | APP1 APP2 APP3 | |APP1 APP2 APP3| +----------------+ +--------------+ | UDP | | | | UDP | | IPv6 | | | | IPv6 | +--------+ | | +--------+ | SCHC C/D & F/R | | | | | | | +-------+--------+ +--------+-----+ $ . $ +---------+ +--------------+ +---------+ . +~~ |Sigfox BS| |Sigfox Network| | SCHC | . | (RG) | === | (NGW) | === |F/R & C/D|..... +---------+ +--------------+ +---------+ Figure 1: Network Architecture In the case of the global Sigfox Network, RGs (or Base Stations) are distributed over multiple countries wherever the Sigfox LPWAN service is provided. The NGW (or cloud-based Sigfox Core Network) is a single entity that connects to all Sigfox base stations in the world, providing hence a global single star network topology. The Device is sending applications flows that are compressed and/or fragmented by a SCHC Compressor/Decompressor (SCHC C/D + F/R) to reduce headers size and/or fragment the packet. The resulting SCHC Message is sent over a layer two (L2) Sigfox frame to the Sigfox Base Stations, which then forward the SCHC Message to the Network Gateway (NGW). The NGW then delivers the SCHC Message and associated gathered metadata to the Network SCHC C/D + F/R. The Sigfox Network (NGW) communicates with the Network SCHC C/D + F/R for compression/decompression and/or for fragmentation/reassembly. The Network SCHC C/D + F/R share the same set of rules as the Dev SCHC C/D + F/R. The Network SCHC C/D + F/R can be collocated with the NGW or it could be located in a different place, as long as a tunnel or secured communication is established between the NGW and the SCHC C/D + F/R functions. After decompression and/or reassembly, the packet can be forwarded over the Internet to one (or several) LPWAN Application Server(s) (App). The SCHC C/D + F/R processes are bidirectional, so the same principles are applicable on both uplink and downlink. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 4] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 4.2. Uplink Uplink Sigfox transmissions occur in repetitions over different times and frequencies. Besides these time and frequency diversities, the Sigfox network also provides space diversity, as potentially an uplink message will be received by several base stations. Since all messages are self-contained and base stations forward them all back to the same Core Network, multiple input copies can be combined at the NGW and hence provide for extra reliability based on the triple diversity (i.e. time, space and frequency). A detailed description of the Sigfox Radio Protocol can be found in [sigfox-spec]. Messages sent from the Device to the Network are delivered by the Sigfox network (NGW) to the Network SCHC C/D + F/R through a callback/API with the following information: o Device ID o Message Sequence Number o Message Payload o Message Timestamp o Device Geolocation (optional) o RSSI (optional) o Device Temperature (optional) o Device Battery Voltage (optional) The Device ID is a globally unique identifier assigned to the Device, which is included in the Sigfox header of every message. The Message Sequence Number is a monotonically increasing number identifying the specific transmission of this uplink message, and it is part of the Sigfox header. The Message Payload corresponds to the payload that the Device has sent in the uplink transmission. The Message Timestamp, Device Geolocation, RSSI, Device Temperature and Device Battery Voltage are metadata parameters provided by the Network. A detailed description of the Sigfox callbacks/APIs can be found in [sigfox-callbacks]. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 5] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 Only messages that have passed the L2 Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) at network reception are delivered by the Sigfox Network to the Network SCHC C/D + F/R. +---------------+-----------------+ | Sigfox Header | Sigfox payload | +---------------+---------------- + | SCHC message | +-----------------+ Figure 2: SCHC Message in Sigfox Figure 2 shows a SCHC Message sent over Sigfox, where the SCHC Message could be a SCHC Packet (e.g. compressed) or a SCHC Fragment (e.g. a piece of a bigger SCHC Packet). 4.3. Downlink Downlink transmissions are Device-driven and can only take place following an uplink communication. Hence, a Device willing to receive downlink messages indicates so to the network in the preceding uplink message with a downlink request flag, and then it opens a fixed window for downlink reception after the uplink transmission. The delay and duration of the reception window have fixed values. If there is a downlink message to be sent for this given Device (e.g. either a response to the uplink message or queued information waiting to be transmitted), the network transmits it to the Device during the reception window. When a downlink message is sent to a Device, an acknowledgement is generated by the Device through the Sigfox protocol and reported by the Sigfox Network. This acknowledgement can be retrieved through callbacks by the customer. A detailed description of the Sigfox Radio Protocol can be found in [sigfox-spec] and a detailed description of the Sigfox callbacks/APIs can be found in [sigfox-callbacks]. 4.4. SCHC Rules The RuleID MUST be included in the SCHC header. The total number of rules to be used affects directly the Rule ID field size, and therefore the total size of the fragmentation header. For this reason, it is recommended to keep the number of rules that are defined for a specific device to the minimum possible. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 6] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 4.5. Fragmentation The SCHC specification [RFC8724] defines a generic fragmentation functionality that allows sending data packets or files larger than the maximum size of a Sigfox data frame. The functionality also defines a mechanism to send reliably multiple messages, by allowing to resend selectively any lost fragments. The SCHC fragmentation supports several modes of operation. These modes have different advantages and disadvantages depending on the specifics of the underlying LPWAN technology and application Use Case. This section describes how the SCHC fragmentation functionality should optimally be implemented when used over a Sigfox LPWAN for the most typical Use Case applications. 4.5.1. Uplink Fragmentation Sigfox uplink transmissions are completely asynchronous and can take place in any random frequency of the allowed uplink bandwidth allocation. Hence, devices can go to deep sleep mode, and then wake up and transmit whenever there is a need to send any information to the network. In that way, there is no need to perform any network attachment, synchronization, or other procedure before transmitting a data packet. All data packets are self-contained with all the required information for the network to process them accordingly. Since uplink transmissions occur asynchronously, an SCHC fragment can be transmitted at any given time by the Device. Sigfox uplink messages are fixed in size, and as described in [RFC8376] they can carry 0-12 bytes payload. Hence, a single SCHC Tile size per mode can be defined so that every Sigfox message always carries one SCHC Tile. 4.5.1.1. Uplink No-ACK Mode No-ACK is RECOMMENDED to be used for transmitting short, non-critical packets that require fragmentation and do not require full reliability. This mode can be used by uplink-only devices that do not support downlink communications, or by bidirectional devices when they send non-critical data. The RECOMMENDED Fragmentation Header size is 8 bits, and it is composed as follows: o RuleID size: 4 bits o DTag size (T): 0 bits Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 7] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 o Fragment Compressed Number (FCN) size (N): 4 bits o As per [RFC8724], in the No-ACK mode the W (window) field is not present. o RCS: Not used 4.5.1.2. Uplink ACK-on-Error Mode: Single-byte SCHC Header ACK-on-Error with single-byte header is RECOMMENDED for medium-large size packets that need to be sent reliably. ACK-on-Error is optimal for Sigfox transmissions, since it leads to a reduced number of ACKs in the lower capacity downlink channel. Also, downlink messages can be sent asynchronously and opportunistically. Allowing transmission of packets/files up to 300 bytes long, the SCHC uplink Fragmentation Header size is RECOMMENDED to be 8 bits in size and is composed as follows: o Rule ID size: 3 bits o DTag size (T): 0 bits o Window index (W) size (M): 2 bits o Fragment Compressed Number (FCN) size (N): 3 bits o MAX_ACK_REQUESTS: 5 o WINDOW_SIZE: 7 (with a maximum value of FCN=0b110) o Tile size: 11 bytes o Retransmission Timer: Application-dependent o Inactivity Timer: Application-dependent o RCS: Not used The correspondent SCHC ACK in the downlink is 13 bits long, so padding is needed to complete the required 64 bits of Sigfox payload. 4.5.1.3. Uplink ACK-on-Error Mode: Two-byte SCHC Header ACK-on-Error with two-byte header is RECOMMENDED for very large size packets that need to be sent reliably. ACK-on-Error is optimal for Sigfox transmissions, since it leads to a reduced number of ACKs in Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 8] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 the lower capacity downlink channel. Also, downlink messages can be sent asynchronously and opportunistically. In order to allow transmission of very large packets/files up to 2250 bytes long, the SCHC uplink Fragmentation Header size is RECOMMENDED to be 16 bits in size and composed as follows: o Rule ID size is: 8 bits o DTag size (T) is: 0 bits o Window index (W) size (M): 3 bits o Fragment Compressed Number (FCN) size (N): 5 bits. o MAX_ACK_REQUESTS: 5 o WINDOW_SIZE: 31 (with a maximum value of FCN=0b11110) o Tile size: 10 bytes o Retransmission Timer: Application-dependent o Inactivity Timer: Application-dependent o RCS: Not used The correspondent SCHC ACK in the downlink is 43 bits long, so padding is needed to complete the required 64 bits of Sigfox payload. 4.5.1.4. All-1 behaviour + Sigfox Sequence Number For ACK-on-Error, as defined in [RFC8724] it is expected that the last SCHC fragment of the last window will always be delivered with an All-1 FCN. Since this last window may not be full (i.e. it may be comprised of less than WINDOW_SIZE fragments), an All-1 fragment may follow a value of FCN higher than 1 (0b01). In this case, the receiver could not derive from the FCN values alone whether there are any missing fragments right before the All-1 fragment or not. However, since a Message Sequence Number is provided by the Sigfox protocol together with the Sigfox Payload, the receiver can detect if there are missing fragments before the All-1 and hence construct the corresponding SCHC ACK Bitmap accordingly. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 9] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 4.5.2. Downlink Fragmentation In some LPWAN technologies, as part of energy-saving techniques, downlink transmission is only possible immediately after an uplink transmission. This allows the device to go in a very deep sleep mode and preserve battery, without the need to listen to any information from the network. This is the case for Sigfox-enabled devices, which can only listen to downlink communications after performing an uplink transmission and requesting a downlink. When there are fragments to be transmitted in the downlink, an uplink message is required to trigger the downlink communication. In order to avoid potentially high delay for fragmented datagram transmission in the downlink, the fragment receiver MAY perform an uplink transmission as soon as possible after reception of a downlink fragment that is not the last one. Such uplink transmission MAY be triggered by sending a SCHC message, such as a SCHC ACK. However, other data messages can equally be used to trigger DL communications. Sigfox downlink messages are fixed in size, and as described in [RFC8376] they can carry up to 8 bytes payload. Hence, a single SCHC Tile size per mode can be defined so that every Sigfox message always carries one SCHC Tile. For reliable downlink fragment transmission, the ACK-Always mode is RECOMMENDED. The SCHC downlink Fragmentation Header size is RECOMMENDED to be 8 bits in size and is composed as follows: o RuleID size: 3 bits o DTag size (T): 0 bits o Window index (W) size (M) is: 0 bits o Fragment Compressed Number (FCN) size (N): 5 bits o MAX_ACK_REQUESTS: 5 o WINDOW_SIZE: 31 (with a maximum value of FCN=0b11110) o Tile size: 7 bytes o Retransmission Timer: Application-dependent o Inactivity Timer: Application-dependent Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 10] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 o RCS: Not used 4.6. Padding The Sigfox payload fields have different characteristics in uplink and downlink. Uplink frames can contain a payload size from 0 to 12 bytes. The radio protocol allows sending zero bits, one single bit of information for binary applications (e.g. status), or an integer number of bytes. Therefore, for 2 or more bits of payload it is required to add padding to the next integer number of bytes. The reason for this flexibility is to optimize transmission time and hence save battery consumption at the device. Downlink frames on the other hand have a fixed length. The payload length must be 64 bits (i.e. 8 bytes). Hence, if less information bits are to be transmitted, padding would be necessary. 5. Security considerations The radio protocol authenticates and ensures the integrity of each message. This is achieved by using a unique device ID and an AES-128 based message authentication code, ensuring that the message has been generated and sent by the device with the ID claimed in the message. Application data can be encrypted at the application level or not, depending on the criticality of the use case. This flexibility allows providing a balance between cost and effort vs. risk. AES-128 in counter mode is used for encryption. Cryptographic keys are independent for each device. These keys are associated with the device ID and separate integrity and confidentiality keys are pre- provisioned. A confidentiality key is only provisioned if confidentiality is to be used. The radio protocol has protections against reply attacks, and the cloud-based core network provides firewalling protection against undesired incoming communications. 6. Acknowledgements Carles Gomez has been funded in part by the ERDF and the Spanish Government through project TEC2016-79988-P. The authors would like to thank Diego Wistuba, Clement Mannequin and Sandra Cespedes for their useful comments and design considerations. Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 11] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 7. References 7.1. Normative References [RFC8376] Farrell, S., Ed., "Low-Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) Overview", RFC 8376, DOI 10.17487/RFC8376, May 2018, . [RFC8724] Minaburo, A., Toutain, L., Gomez, C., Barthel, D., and JC. Zuniga, "SCHC: Generic Framework for Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation", RFC 8724, DOI 10.17487/RFC8724, April 2020, . 7.2. Informative References [sigfox-callbacks] Sigfox, "Sigfox Callbacks", . [sigfox-spec] Sigfox, "Sigfox Radio Specifications", . Authors' Addresses Juan Carlos Zuniga SIGFOX 425 rue Jean Rostand Labege 31670 France Email: JuanCarlos.Zuniga@sigfox.com URI: http://www.sigfox.com/ Carles Gomez Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya C/Esteve Terradas, 7 08860 Castelldefels Spain Email: carlesgo@entel.upc.edu Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 12] Internet-Draft SCHC over Sigfox LPWAN May 2020 Laurent Toutain IMT-Atlantique 2 rue de la Chataigneraie CS 17607 35576 Cesson-Sevigne Cedex France Email: Laurent.Toutain@imt-atlantique.fr Zuniga, et al. Expires November 16, 2020 [Page 13]