draft-ietf-manet-timetlv-04.txt   draft-ietf-manet-timetlv-05.txt 
Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET) T. Clausen Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET) T. Clausen
Internet-Draft LIX, Ecole Polytechnique, France Internet-Draft LIX, Ecole Polytechnique, France
Intended status: Standards Track C. Dearlove Intended status: Standards Track C. Dearlove
Expires: May 19, 2008 BAE Systems Advanced Technology Expires: January 11, 2009 BAE Systems Advanced Technology
Centre Centre
November 16, 2007 July 10, 2008
Representing multi-value time in MANETs Representing multi-value time in MANETs
draft-ietf-manet-timetlv-04 draft-ietf-manet-timetlv-05
Status of this Memo Status of This Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 36 skipping to change at page 1, line 36
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 19, 2008. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 11, 2009.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract Abstract
This document describes a general and flexible TLV (type-length-value This document describes a general and flexible TLV (type-length-value
structure) for representing time using the generalized MANET packet/ structure) for representing time using the generalized MANET packet/
message format. It defines two message and two address block TLVs message format. It defines two message and two address block TLVs
for representing validity and interval times for MANET routing for representing validity and interval times for MANET routing
protocols. protocols.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Motivation and Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Protocol Overview and Functioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Protocol Overview and Functioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Representing Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Representing Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. General Time TLV Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. General Time TLV Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Message TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1. Single-value Time TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. VALIDITY_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.2. Multi-value Time TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.2. INTERVAL_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Message TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Address Block TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7.1. INTERVAL_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.1. VALIDITY_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7.2. VALIDITY_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.2. INTERVAL_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. Address Block TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.1. INTERVAL_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.1. Message TLV Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.2. VALIDITY_TIME TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.2. Address Block TLV Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9.1. Expert Review: Evaluation Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . 10
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 9.2. Message TLV Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 9.3. Address Block TLV Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 18 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The generalized packet/message format [1] specifies a signaling The generalized packet/message format [packetbb] specifies a
format which MANET routing protocols can employ for exchanging signaling format which MANET routing protocols can employ for
protocol information. This format presents the ability to express exchanging protocol information. This format presents the ability to
and associate attributes to packets, messages or addresses, by way of express and associate attributes to packets, messages or addresses,
a general TLV (type-length-value) mechanism. by way of a general TLV (type-length-value) mechanism.
This document specifies a general Time TLV structure, which can be This document specifies a general Time TLV structure, which can be
used by any MANET routing protocol that needs to express either used by any MANET routing protocol that needs to express either
single time-values or a set of time-values with each time-value single time-values or a set of time-values with each time-value
associated with a range of distances. Distances may be equated to associated with a range of hop counts, as provided by the message
hop count, as provided by [1]. This allows a receiving node to header of [packetbb]. This allows a receiving node to determine a
determine a single time-value if either it knows its distance from single time-value if either it knows its hop count from the
the originator node, or the Time TLV specifies a single time-value. originator node, or the Time TLV specifies a single time-value.
This document also specifies two message TLV types, which use the TLV This document also specifies two message TLV types, which use the TLV
structure proposed. These TLV types are INTERVAL_TIME and structure proposed. These TLV types are INTERVAL_TIME and
VALIDITY_TIME, specifying respectively the maximum time before VALIDITY_TIME, specifying respectively the maximum time before
another message of the same type as this message from the same another message of the same type as this message from the same
originator should be received, and the duration for which the originator should be received, and the duration for which the
information in this message is valid after receipt. Note that, if information in this message is valid after receipt. Note that, if
both are present, then the latter will usually be greater than the both are present, then the latter will usually be greater than the
former in order to allow for possible message loss. former in order to allow for possible message loss.
This document also specifies two address block TLV types, which use This document also specifies two address block TLV types, which use
the TLV structure proposed. These TLV types are INTERVAL_TIME and the TLV structure proposed. These TLV types are INTERVAL_TIME and
VALIDITY_TIME, defined equivalently to the two message TLVs with the VALIDITY_TIME, defined equivalently to the two message TLVs with the
same names. same names.
1.1. Motivation and Rationale
The TLV mechanism as specified in [packetbb] allows associating a
"value" to either a packet, a message or to addresses. The data
structure for doing so - the TLV - is identical in each of the three
cases, however the TLV's position in a received packet allows
determining if that TLV is a "packet TLV" (it appears in the packet
header, before any messages), a "message TLV" (it appears in the TLV
block immediately following a message header) or an "address block
TLV" (it appears in the TLV block immediately following an address
block).
While TLVs may be structurally identical, that which they express may
be different. This is determined from the kind (packet, message or
address block) and type of the TLV. For example one TLV might
associate a lifetime to an address, another a content sequence number
to a message, and another a cryptographic signature to a packet. For
this reason, [packetbb] specifies separate registries for packet,
message and address block TLV types, and does not specify any
structure in the TLV value field.
The TLVs defined in this document express, essentially, that "this
information will be refreshed within X seconds" and that "this
information is valid for X seconds after being received", each
allowing the "X seconds" to be specified as a function of the number
of hops from the originator of the information. This document
specifies a general format allowing expressing and encoding this as
the value field of a TLV. This representation uses a compact (8 bit)
representation of time, as message size is an issue in many MANETs,
and the offered precision and range is appropriate for MANET routing
protocols.
A TLV of this format may be used for packets, messages or addresses.
For example, a proactive MANET routing protocol periodically
reporting link state information could include a TLV of this format
as a message TLV. This may indicate a different periodicity in
different scopes (possibly frequently up to a few hops, less
frequently beyond that) because some messages may be sent with
limited scope, as specified in [packetbb]. A reactive MANET routing
protocol could include a TLV of this format as an address block TLV
for reporting the lifetime of routes to individual addresses.
In addition to defining the general format as outlined above, this
document requests IANA assignments for INTERVAL_TIME and
VALIDITY_TIME TLVs. These IANA assignments are requested in this
document in order to avoid interdependencies between otherwise
unrelated MANET protocols and in order to not exhaust the TLV type
spaces by having different protocols request types for essentially
identical data structures. Only message and address block TLVs are
requested, as these are those for which a need has been demonstrated.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [2]. "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
[RFC2119].
Additionally, this document uses terminology from [1], and introduces Additionally, this document uses terminology from [packetbb], and
the following terminology: introduces the following terminology:
Distance - the distance from the message originator to the message hop count - the number of hops from the message originator to the
recipient. If the distance is equated to the messages hop count, message recipient. This is defined to equal the <hop-count> field
then this may be indicated using the <hop-count> field in the full in the <msg-header> element defined in [packetbb], if present,
message header defined in [1], after being incremented on after it is incremented on reception. If the <hop-count> field is
reception. not present, or in a packet TLV, then hop count is defined to
equal 255.
Time-value - a time, measured in seconds. time-value - a time, measured in seconds.
Time-code - an 8 bit field, representing a time-value. time-code - an 8 bit field, representing a time-value.
3. Applicability Statement 3. Applicability Statement
The TLV described in this document is applicable whenever a single The TLV structure described in this document is applicable whenever a
time-value, or a time-value that varies with distance from the single time-value, or a time-value that varies with the number of
originator of a message, is required in a protocol using the hops from the originator of a message, is required in a protocol
generalized MANET packet/message format [1]. using the generalized MANET packet/message format [packetbb].
Examples of time-values that may be included in a protocol message Examples of time-values that may be included in a protocol message
are: are:
o The maximum time interval until the next message of the same type o The maximum time interval until the next message of the same type
is to be generated by the message's originator node. is to be generated by the message's originator node.
o The validity time of the information with which the time-value is o The validity time of the information with which the time-value is
associated. associated.
Either of these may vary with the distance between the originating Either of these may vary with the hop count between the originating
and receiving nodes, e.g. if messages of the same type are sent with and receiving nodes, e.g. if messages of the same type are sent with
different hop limits as defined in [1]. different hop limits as defined in [packetbb].
Parts of this document have been generalized from material in the Parts of this document have been generalized from material in the
proactive MANET routing protocol OLSR (The Optimized Link State proactive MANET routing protocol OLSR (The Optimized Link State
Routing Protocol) [4]. Routing Protocol) [RFC3626].
4. Protocol Overview and Functioning 4. Protocol Overview and Functioning
This document does not specify a protocol nor does it mandate This document does not specify a protocol nor does it mandate
specific node or protocol behavior. Rather, it outlines mechanisms specific node or protocol behavior. Rather, it outlines mechanisms
for encoding time-values using the TLV mechanism of [1]. for encoding time-values using the TLV mechanism of [packetbb].
5. Representing Time 5. Representing Time
This document specifies a TLV structure in which time-values are each This document specifies a TLV structure in which time-values are each
represented in an 8 bit time-code, one or more of which may be used represented in an 8 bit time-code, one or more of which may be used
in a TLV's <value> field. Of these 8 bits, the least significant 3 in a TLV's <value> field. Of these 8 bits, the least significant 3
bits represent the mantissa (a), and the most significant 5 bits bits represent the mantissa (a), and the most significant 5 bits
represent the exponent (b), so that: represent the exponent (b), so that:
o time-value = (1 + a/8) * 2^b * C o time-value = (1 + a/8) * 2^b * C
o time-code = 8 * b + a o time-code = 8 * b + a
All nodes in the MANET MUST use the same value of the constant C,
All nodes in the network MUST use the same value of the constant C,
which will be specified in seconds, hence so will be all time-values. which will be specified in seconds, hence so will be all time-values.
C MUST be greater than 0 seconds. Note that ascending values of the C MUST be greater than 0 seconds. Note that ascending values of the
time-code represent ascending time-values, time-values may thus be time-code represent ascending time-values, time-values may thus be
compared by comparison of time-codes. compared by comparison of time-codes.
An algorithm for computing the time-code representing the smallest An algorithm for computing the time-code representing the smallest
representable time-value not less than the time-value t is: representable time-value not less than the time-value t is:
1. find the largest integer b such that t/C >= 2^b; 1. find the largest integer b such that t/C >= 2^b;
skipping to change at page 8, line 7 skipping to change at page 6, line 37
second, then this is about 45 days. second, then this is about 45 days.
A protocol using this time representation MUST define the value of C. A protocol using this time representation MUST define the value of C.
A protocol using this specification MAY specify that the all bits A protocol using this specification MAY specify that the all bits
zero time-value (0) represents a time-value of zero and/or that the zero time-value (0) represents a time-value of zero and/or that the
all bits one time-value (255) represents an indefinitely large time- all bits one time-value (255) represents an indefinitely large time-
value. value.
6. General Time TLV Structure 6. General Time TLV Structure
A Time TLV may be a packet, message or address block TLV. If it is a The following data structure allows the representation of a single
packet or message TLV then it must be a single value TLV as defined time-value, or of a default time-value plus pairs of (time-values,
in [1]. If it is an address block TLV then it may be single value or hop counts) for when hop count dependent time-values are required.
multivalue TLV. Note that even a single value Time TLV may contain a The time-values are represented as time-codes as defined in
multiple octet <value> field. Section 5. This <time-data> data structure is specified, using the
regular expression syntax of [packetbb], by:
<time-data> = (<time-code><hop count>)*<time-code>
where:
<time-code> is an 8 bit unsigned integer field containing a time-
code as defined in Section 5.
<hop count> is an 8 bit unsigned integer field specifying a hop
count from the message originator.
A <time-data> structure thus consists of an odd number of octets;
with a repetition factor of n for the (time, hop count) pairs in the
regular expression syntax, it contains 2n+1 octets. On reception, n
is determined from the length.
A <time-data> field may be thus represented by:
<t_1><d_1><t_2><d_2> ... <t_i><d_i> ... <t_n><d_n><t_default>
<d_1>, ... <d_n>, if present, MUST be a strictly increasing sequence,
with <d_n> < 255. Then, at the receiving node's hop count from the
originator node, the time-value indicated is that represented by the
time-code:
o <t_1>, if n > 0 and hop count <= <d_1>;
o <t_i+1>, if n > 1 and <d_i> < hop count <= <d_i+1> for some i such
that 1 <= i < n;
o <t_default> otherwise, i.e. if n == 0 or hop count > <d_n>.
If included in a message without a <hop-count> field in its message
header, or in a packet TLV, then the form of this data structure with
a single time-code in <time-data> (i.e. n == 0) SHOULD be used.
6.1. Single-value Time TLVs
The purpose of a single value Time TLV is to allow a single time- The purpose of a single value Time TLV is to allow a single time-
value to be determined by a node receiving an entity containing the value to be determined by a node receiving an entity containing the
Time TLV, based on its distance from the entity's originator. The Time TLV, based on its hop count from the entity's originator. The
Time TLV may contain information that allows that time-value to be a Time TLV may contain information that allows that time-value to be a
function of distance, and thus different receiving nodes may function of the hop count, and thus different receiving nodes may
determine different time-values. If a receiving node will not be determine different time-values.
able to determine its distance from the originating node, then the
form of this Time TLV with a single time-code in a <value> field (or
single value subfield) SHOULD be used.
The <value> field of a single value Time TLV is specified, using the A single-value Time TLV may be a packet TLVs, a message TLV or an
regular expression syntax of [1], by: address block TLV.
<value> = {<time><distance>}*<time> A Time TLV which has the tismultivalue flag cleared ('0') in its
<tlv-flags> field, as defined in [packetbb], contains a single <time-
data>, as defined above, in its <value> field. For such a Time TLV:
where: o The <length> field in the TLV MUST contain the value 2n+1, with n
being the number of (time-value, hop count) pairs in the Time TLV.
<time> is an 8 bit field containing a time-code as defined in o The number of (time-value, hop count) pairs MUST be identified by
Section 5. inspecting the <length> field in the TLV. The number of such
pairs, n, is:
<distance> is an 8 bit field specifying a distance from the message * n = (<length> - 1) / 2
originator.
A single value <value> field thus consists of an odd number of This MUST be an integer value.
octets; with a repetition factor of n for the (time, distance) pairs
in the regular expression syntax it contains 2n+1 octets, thus the
<length> field of a single value Time TLV, which MUST always be
present, is given by:
o <length> = 2n+1 6.2. Multi-value Time TLVs
A single value <value> field may be thus represented by: The purpose of a multi-value Time TLV is to associate a set of <time-
data> structures to an identically sized set of addresses, as
described in [packetbb]. For each of these <time-data> structures, a
single time-value can be determined by a node receiving an entity
containing the Time TLV, based on its hop count from the entity's
originator. The Time TLV may contain information that allows that
time-value to be a function of the hop count, and thus different
receiving nodes may determine different time-values.
<t_1><d_1><t_2><d_2> ... <t_i><d_i> ... <t_n><d_n><t_default> Multi-value Time TLVs MUST be address block TLVs. A multi-value Time
TLV MUST NOT be a packet or message TLV.
<d_1>, ... <d_n>, if present, MUST be a strictly increasing sequence. A Time TLV which has the tismultivalue flag set ('1') in its <tlv-
Then, at the receiving node's distance from the originator node, the flags> field, as defined in [packetbb], contains a sequence of <time-
time-value indicated is that represented by the time-code: data> structures, as defined above, in its <value> field. For such a
Time TLV:
o <t_1>, if n > 0 and distance <= <d_1>; o The <length> field in the TLV MUST contain the value m * (2n+1),
with n being the number of (time-value, hop count) pairs in the
Time TLV, and m being number-values as defined in [packetbb].
o <t_i+1>, if n > 1 and <d_i> < distance <= <d_i+1> for some i such o The number of <time-data> structures included in the <value> field
that 1 <= i < n; is equal to number-values as defined in [packetbb].
o <t_default> otherwise, i.e. if n == 0 or distance > <d_n>. o The number of (time-value, hop count) pairs in each <time-data>
structure MUST be the same, and MUST be identified by inspecting
the <length> field in the TLV and using number-values as defined
in [packetbb]. The number of such pairs in each <time-data>
structure, n, is:
In a multivalue Time TLV, each single value subfield of the * n = ((<length> / number-values) - 1) / 2
multivalue Time TLV is defined as above. Note that [1] requires that
each single value subfield has the same length (i.e. the same value This MUST be an integer value. The lists of hop count values MAY
of n) but they need not use the same values of <d_1> to <d_n>. be different.
7. Message TLVs 7. Message TLVs
Two message TLVs are defined, for signaling message validity time Two message TLVs are defined, for signaling message interval
(VALIDITY_TIME) and message interval (INTERVAL_TIME). (INTERVAL_TIME) and message validity time (VALIDITY_TIME).
7.1. VALIDITY_TIME TLV 7.1. INTERVAL_TIME TLV
An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is a message TLV that defines the maximum time
before another message of the same type as this message from the same
originator should be received. This interval time MAY be specified
to depend on the hop count from the originator. (This is appropriate
if messages are sent with different hop limits, so that receiving
nodes at greater hop counts have an increased interval time.)
A message MUST NOT include more than one INTERVAL_TIME TLV.
An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in
Section 5.
7.2. VALIDITY_TIME TLV
A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is a message TLV that defines the validity time A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is a message TLV that defines the validity time
of the information carried in the message in which the TLV is of the information carried in the message in which the TLV is
contained. After this time the receiving node MUST consider the contained. After this time the receiving node MUST consider the
message content to no longer be valid (unless repeated in a later message content to no longer be valid (unless repeated in a later
message). The validity time of a message MAY be specified to depend message). The validity time of a message MAY be specified to depend
on the distance from its originator. (This is appropriate if on the hop count from its originator. (This is appropriate if
messages are sent with different hop limits, so that receiving nodes messages are sent with different hop limits, so that receiving nodes
at greater distances receive information less frequently and must at greater hop counts receive information less frequently and must
treat is as valid for longer.) treat is as valid for longer.)
A message MUST NOT include more than one VALIDITY_TIME TLV. A message MUST NOT include more than one VALIDITY_TIME TLV.
A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in
Section 5. Section 5.
7.2. INTERVAL_TIME TLV 8. Address Block TLVs
An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is a message TLV that defines the maximum time Two address block TLVs are defined, for signaling address
before another message of the same type as this message from the same advertisement interval (INTERVAL_TIME) and address validity time
originator should be received. This interval time MAY be specified (VALIDITY_TIME).
to depend on the distance from the originator. (This is appropriate
if messages are sent with different hop limits, so that receiving
nodes at greater distances have an increased interval time.)
A message MUST NOT include more than one INTERVAL_TIME TLV. 8.1. INTERVAL_TIME TLV
An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is an address block TLV that defines the maximum
Section 5. time before this address from the same originator should be received
again. This interval time MAY be specified to depend on the hop
count from the originator. (This is appropriate if addresses are
contained in messages sent with different hop limits, so that
receiving nodes at greater hop counts have an increased interval
time.)
8. Address Block TLVs A protocol using this TLV and the similarly named message TLV MUST
specify how to interpret the case when both are present (typically
that the former over-rides the latter for those addresses which are
covered by the former).
Two address block TLVs are defined, for signaling address validity An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in
time (VALIDITY_TIME) and address advertisement interval Section 5.
(INTERVAL_TIME).
8.1. VALIDITY_TIME TLV 8.2. VALIDITY_TIME TLV
A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is an address block TLV that defines the validity A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is an address block TLV that defines the validity
time of the addresses to which the TLV is associated. After this time of the addresses to which the TLV is associated. After this
time the receiving node MUST consider the addresses to no longer be time the receiving node MUST consider the addresses to no longer be
valid (unless these are repeated in a later message). The validity valid (unless these are repeated in a later message). The validity
time of an address MAY be specified to depend on the distance from time of an address MAY be specified to depend on the hop count from
its originator. (This is appropriate if addresses are contained in its originator. (This is appropriate if addresses are contained in
messages sent with different hop limits, so that receiving nodes at messages sent with different hop limits, so that receiving nodes at
greater distances receive information less frequently and must treat greater hop counts receive information less frequently and must treat
is as valid for longer.) is as valid for longer.)
A protocol using this TLV and the similarly named message TLV MUST A protocol using this TLV and the similarly named message TLV MUST
specify how to interpret the case when both are present (typically specify how to interpret the case when both are present (typically
that the former over-rides the latter for those addresses which are that the former over-rides the latter for those addresses which are
covered by the former). covered by the former).
A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in A VALIDITY_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in
Section 5. Section 5.
8.2. INTERVAL_TIME TLV
An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is an address block TLV that defines the maximum
time before this address from the same originator should be received.
This interval time MAY be specified to depend on the distance from
the originator. (This is appropriate if addresses are contained in
messages sent with different hop limits, so that receiving nodes at
greater distances have an increased interval time.)
A protocol using this TLV and the similarly named message TLV MUST
specify how to interpret the case when both are present (typically
that the former over-rides the latter for those addresses which are
covered by the former).
An INTERVAL_TIME TLV is an example of a Time TLV specified as in
Section 5.
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA Considerations
This specification defines two message TLV types, which must be This specification defines two message TLV types, which must be
allocated from the "Assigned Message TLV Types" repository of [1] as allocated from the "Assigned Message TLV Types" repository of
specified in Table 1 and two address block TLV types, which must be [packetbb] as specified in Table 1 and two address block TLV types,
allocated from the "Assigned Address Block TLV Types" repository of which must be allocated from the "Assigned Address Block TLV Types"
[1] as specified in Table 2. repository of [packetbb] as specified in Table 2.
IANA is requested to assign the same numerical value to the message IANA is requested to assign the same numerical value to the message
TLV and address block TLV types with the same mnemonic. TLV and address block TLV types with the same name.
9.1. Message TLV Types 9.1. Expert Review: Evaluation Guidelines
For the registries for TLV type extensions where an Expert Review is
required, the designated expert SHOULD take the same general
recommendations into consideration as are specified by [packetbb].
9.2. Message TLV Types
+---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+ +---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+
| Name | Type | Type | Description | | Name | Type | Type | Description |
| | | Extension | | | | | Extension | |
+---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+ +---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+
| VALIDITY_TIME | TBD1 | 0 | The time from receipt of the | | INTERVAL_TIME | TBD1 | 0 | The maximum time before |
| | | | message during which the |
| | | | information contained in the |
| | | | message is to be considered |
| | | | valid |
| | | | |
| | | 1-255 | RESERVED |
| | | | |
| INTERVAL_TIME | TBD2 | 0 | The maximum time before |
| | | | another message of the same | | | | | another message of the same |
| | | | type as this message from the | | | | | type as this message from the |
| | | | same originator should be | | | | | same originator should be |
| | | | received | | | | | received |
| | | | | | | | 1-223 | Expert Review |
| | | 1-255 | RESERVED | | | | 224-255 | Experimental Use |
| VALIDITY_TIME | TBD2 | 0 | The time from receipt of the |
| | | | message during which the |
| | | | information contained in the |
| | | | message is to be considered |
| | | | valid |
| | | 1-223 | Expert Review |
| | | 224-255 | Experimental Use |
+---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+ +---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+
Table 1 Table 1
Type extensions indicated as RESERVED may be allocated by standards 9.3. Address Block TLV Types
action, as specified in [3].
9.2. Address Block TLV Types
+---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+ +---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+
| Name | Type | Type | Description | | Name | Type | Type | Description |
| | | extension | | | | | extension | |
+---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+ +---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+
| VALIDITY_TIME | TBD1 | 0 | The time from receipt of the | | INTERVAL_TIME | TBD1 | 0 | The maximum time before |
| | | | address during which the |
| | | | information regarding this |
| | | | address is to be considered |
| | | | valid |
| | | | |
| | | 1-255 | RESERVED |
| | | | |
| INTERVAL_TIME | TBD2 | 0 | The maximum time before |
| | | | another message of the same | | | | | another message of the same |
| | | | type as this message from the | | | | | type as this message from the |
| | | | same originator and containing | | | | | same originator and containing |
| | | | this address should be | | | | | this address should be |
| | | | received | | | | | received |
| | | | | | | | 1-223 | Expert Review |
| | | 1-255 | RESERVED | | | | 224-255 | Experimental Use |
| VALIDITY_TIME | TBD2 | 0 | The time from receipt of the |
| | | | address during which the |
| | | | information regarding this |
| | | | address is to be considered |
| | | | valid |
| | | 1-223 | Expert Review |
| | | 224-255 | Experimental Use |
+---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+ +---------------+------+-----------+--------------------------------+
Table 2 Table 2
Type extensions indicated as RESERVED may be allocated by standards
action, as specified in [3].
10. Security Considerations 10. Security Considerations
This document does not specify any security considerations. This document does not specify any security considerations.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[1] Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Dean, J., and C. Adjih, "Generalized [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
MANET Packet/Message Format", Work In Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.
Progress draft-ietf-manet-packetbb-11.txt, November 2007.
[2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.
[3] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA [packetbb] Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Dean, J., and C. Adjih,
Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 2434, BCP 26, October 1998. "Generalized MANET Packet/Message Format",
draft-ietf-manet-packetbb-13.txt (work in progress),
June 2008.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[4] Clausen, T. and P. Jacquet, "The Optimized Link State Routing [RFC3626] Clausen, T. and P. Jacquet, "The Optimized Link State
Protocol", RFC 3626, October 2003. Routing Protocol", RFC 3626, October 2003.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements Appendix A. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Brian Adamson and Justin Dean (both The authors would like to thank Brian Adamson and Justin Dean (both
NRL) for their contributions, and Alan Cullen (BAE Systems) for his NRL) and Ian Chakeres (Motorola) for their contributions, and Alan
careful review of this specification. Cullen (BAE Systems) for his careful review of this specification.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Thomas Heide Clausen Thomas Heide Clausen
LIX, Ecole Polytechnique, France LIX, Ecole Polytechnique, France
Phone: +33 6 6058 9349 Phone: +33 6 6058 9349
Email: T.Clausen@computer.org EMail: T.Clausen@computer.org
URI: http://www.ThomasClausen.org/ URI: http://www.ThomasClausen.org/
Christopher Dearlove Christopher Dearlove
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
Phone: +44 1245 242194 Phone: +44 1245 242194
Email: chris.dearlove@baesystems.com EMail: chris.dearlove@baesystems.com
URI: http://www.baesystems.com/ URI: http://www.baesystems.com/
Full Copyright Statement Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights. retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
skipping to change at page 18, line 44 skipping to change at line 582
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr. http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org. ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
 End of changes. 69 change blocks. 
185 lines changed or deleted 281 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/