Internet-Draft Programmable IP in IOT October 2022
Du Expires 26 April 2023 [Page]
Network Working Group
Intended Status:
Z. Du
China Mobile

Programmable IP Format in IOT Network


This document describes a programmable IP format communication mechanism for the IOT network .

Requirements Language

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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

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

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 26 April 2023.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

There will be more and more IOT devices deployed in the future. IOT networks are deployed widely in the residential scenarios and in the smart city scenarios. However, the IOT devices belonging to different vendors are hard to communicate.

Normally, they need to connect to the servers in the cloud, and then perhaps they can make some cooperation. It is to say that they can not communicate freely in the local network. We suggest that what we need here is a new layer 3 narrow waist for different IOT networks.

IOT devices have many different requirements, so that we need a programmable IP format for a specific IOT network. For example, some IOT networks may need an IP format that has simplified format; meanwhile, some IOT networks may need an IP format that contains more security considerations.

In this document, we introduce a mechanism to signal the selected format for an IOT network. Our final goal is to support a programmable IP format for various IOT networks.

2. Proposed Mechanism Description

In the current Internet, we have designed a uniform IP format [RFC4291]. It can benefit the communication among all the devices in the Internet. However, the IOT networks are quite different from the traditional IP network, and we need a programmable layer 3 for them to enable a better local communication.

As we have not assumed a unified format in the layer 3, we need to determinate the encapsulation format of the layer 3. For example, we can make a bitmap to communicate between the gateway of the IOT network and a new IOT device that needs to communicate with the IOT network. In other words, they can negotiation the format of the layer 3.

We suggest using some communications in the layer 2 to determinate the encapsulation format of the layer 3. The new IOT device may send a L2 frame to the gateway of the IOT network. The gateway may response another L2 frame that contains the information about the format in this IOT network.

By using the information in the frame from the gateway, the new IOT device can connect to the IOT network and communicate with the IOT devices in the IOT network.

The encapsulation information can be an index of some pre-configured format, or it can be a bitmap that describes the encapsulation format in the IOT network. In the later case, the bitmap may indicate whether a specific item is encoded in the format, for example, the SA, the TTL, or the next header. Each bit in the bitmap should be pre-configured and can be understood without ambiguity. Following the bitmap, some offsets should be given, so that we can determine the length of each item that is contained in the format. Hence, we can make a flexible platform for the encapsulation of the layer 3 in the IOT network, while the different format requirements of the IOT networks can be fulfilled.

3. IANA Considerations


4. Security Considerations


5. Acknowledgements


6. References

6.1. Normative References

Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <>.

6.2. Informative References

Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, , <>.

Author's Address

Zongpeng Du
China Mobile
No.32 XuanWuMen West Street