GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc7548

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Ersue, Ed. Request for Comments: 7548 Nokia Networks Category: Informational D. Romascanu ISSN: 2070-1721 Avaya

                                                      J. Schoenwaelder
                                                             A. Sehgal
                                              Jacobs University Bremen
                                                              May 2015
     Management of Networks with Constrained Devices: Use Cases

Abstract

 This document discusses use cases concerning the management of
 networks in which constrained devices are involved.  A problem
 statement, deployment options, and the requirements on the networks
 with constrained devices can be found in the companion document on
 "Management of Networks with Constrained Devices: Problem Statement
 and Requirements" (RFC 7547).

Status of This Memo

 This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
 published for informational purposes.
 This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
 (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
 received public review and has been approved for publication by the
 Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
 approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
 Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
 Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
 and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
 http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7548.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 1] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

Copyright Notice

 Copyright (c) 2015 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
 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 ....................................................3
 2. Access Technologies .............................................4
    2.1. Constrained Access Technologies ............................4
    2.2. Cellular Access Technologies ...............................5
 3. Device Life Cycle ...............................................6
    3.1. Manufacturing and Initial Testing ..........................6
    3.2. Installation and Configuration .............................6
    3.3. Operation and Maintenance ..................................7
    3.4. Recommissioning and Decommissioning ........................7
 4. Use Cases .......................................................8
    4.1. Environmental Monitoring ...................................8
    4.2. Infrastructure Monitoring ..................................9
    4.3. Industrial Applications ...................................10
    4.4. Energy Management .........................................12
    4.5. Medical Applications ......................................14
    4.6. Building Automation .......................................15
    4.7. Home Automation ...........................................17
    4.8. Transport Applications ....................................18
    4.9. Community Network Applications ............................20
    4.10. Field Operations .........................................22
 5. Security Considerations ........................................23
 6. Informative References .........................................24
 Acknowledgments ...................................................25
 Contributors ......................................................26
 Authors' Addresses ................................................26

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 2] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

1. Introduction

 Constrained devices (also known as sensors, smart objects, or smart
 devices) with limited CPU, memory, and power resources can be
 connected to a network.  Such a network of constrained devices itself
 may be constrained or challenged, e.g., with unreliable or lossy
 channels, wireless technologies with limited bandwidth and a dynamic
 topology, needing the service of a gateway or proxy to connect to the
 Internet.  In other scenarios, the constrained devices can be
 connected to a unconstrained network using off-the-shelf protocol
 stacks.  Constrained devices might be in charge of gathering
 information in diverse settings including natural ecosystems,
 buildings, and factories and sending the information to one or more
 server stations.
 Network management is characterized by monitoring network status,
 detecting faults (and inferring their causes), setting network
 parameters, and carrying out actions to remove faults, maintain
 normal operation, and improve network efficiency and application
 performance.  The traditional network management application
 periodically collects information from a set of managed network
 elements, it processes the collected data, and it presents the
 results to the network management users.  Constrained devices,
 however, often have limited power, have low transmission range, and
 might be unreliable.  Such unreliability might arise from device
 itself (e.g., battery exhausted) or from the channel being
 constrained (i.e., low-capacity and high-latency).  They might also
 need to work in hostile environments with advanced security
 requirements or need to be used in harsh environments for a long time
 without supervision.  Due to such constraints, the management of a
 network with constrained devices offers different types of challenges
 compared to the management of a traditional IP network.
 This document aims to understand use cases for the management of a
 network in which constrained devices are involved.  It lists and
 discusses diverse use cases for management from the network as well
 as from the application point of view.  The list of discussed use
 cases is not an exhaustive one since other scenarios, currently
 unknown to the authors, are possible.  The application scenarios
 discussed aim to show where networks of constrained devices are
 expected to be deployed.  For each application scenario, we first
 briefly describe the characteristics followed by a discussion on how
 network management can be provided, who is likely going to be
 responsible for it, and on which time-scale management operations are
 likely to be carried out.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 3] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 A problem statement, deployment and management topology options as
 well as the requirements on the networks with constrained devices can
 be found in the companion document [RFC7547].
 This documents builds on the terminology defined in [RFC7228] and
 [RFC7547].  [RFC7228] is a base document for the terminology
 concerning constrained devices and constrained networks.  Some use
 cases specific to IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks
 (6LoWPANs) can be found in [RFC6568].

2. Access Technologies

 Besides the management requirements imposed by the different use
 cases, the access technologies used by constrained devices can impose
 restrictions and requirements upon the Network Management System
 (NMS) and protocol of choice.
 It is possible that some networks of constrained devices might
 utilize traditional unconstrained access technologies for network
 access, e.g., local area networks with plenty of capacity.  In such
 scenarios, the constrainedness of the device presents special
 management restrictions and requirements rather than the access
 technology utilized.
 However, in other situations, constrained or cellular access
 technologies might be used for network access, thereby causing
 management restrictions and requirements to arise as a result of the
 underlying access technologies.
 A discussion regarding the impact of cellular and constrained access
 technologies is provided in this section since they impose some
 special requirements on the management of constrained networks.  On
 the other hand, fixed-line networks (e.g., power-line communications)
 are not discussed here since tend to be quite static and do not
 typically impose any special requirements on the management of the
 network.

2.1. Constrained Access Technologies

 Due to resource restrictions, embedded devices deployed as sensors
 and actuators in the various use cases utilize low-power, low-data-
 rate wireless access technologies such as [IEEE802.15.4], Digital
 Enhanced Cordless Telecommunication (DECT) Ultra Low Energy (ULE), or
 Bluetooth Low-Energy (BT-LE) for network connectivity.
 In such scenarios, it is important for the NMS to be aware of the
 restrictions imposed by these access technologies to efficiently
 manage these constrained devices.  Specifically, such low-power, low-

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 4] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 data-rate access technologies typically have small frame sizes.  So
 it would be important for the NMS and management protocol of choice
 to craft packets in a way that avoids fragmentation and reassembly of
 packets since this can use valuable memory on constrained devices.
 Devices using such access technologies might operate via a gateway
 that translates between these access technologies and more
 traditional Internet protocols.  A hierarchical approach to device
 management in such a situation might be useful, wherein the gateway
 device is in-charge of devices connected to it, while the NMS
 conducts management operations only to the gateway.

2.2. Cellular Access Technologies

 Machine-to-machine (M2M) services are increasingly provided by mobile
 service providers as numerous devices, home appliances, utility
 meters, cars, video surveillance cameras, and health monitors are
 connected with mobile broadband technologies.  Different
 applications, e.g., in a home appliance or in-car network, use
 Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or ZigBee locally and connect to a cellular module
 acting as a gateway between the constrained environment and the
 mobile cellular network.
 Such a gateway might provide different options for the connectivity
 of mobile networks and constrained devices:
 o  a smartphone with 3G/4G and WLAN radio might use BT-LE to connect
    to the devices in a home area network,
 o  a femtocell might be combined with home gateway functionality
    acting as a low-power cellular base station connecting smart
    devices to the application server of a mobile service provider,
 o  an embedded cellular module with LTE radio connecting the devices
    in the car network with the server running the telematics service,
 o  an M2M gateway connected to the mobile operator network supporting
    diverse Internet of Things (IoT) connectivity technologies
    including ZigBee and Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) over
    6LoWPAN over IEEE 802.15.4.
 Common to all scenarios above is that they are embedded in a service
 and connected to a network provided by a mobile service provider.
 Usually, there is a hierarchical deployment and management topology
 in place where different parts of the network are managed by
 different management entities and the count of devices to manage is
 high (e.g., many thousands).  In general, the network is comprised of
 manifold types and sizes of devices matching to different device

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 5] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 classes.  As such, the managing entity needs to be prepared to manage
 devices with diverse capabilities using different communication or
 management protocols.  In the case in which the devices are directly
 connected to a gateway, they most likely are managed by a management
 entity integrated with the gateway, which itself is part of the NMS
 run by the mobile operator.  Smartphones or embedded modules
 connected to a gateway might themselves be in charge of managing the
 devices on their level.  The initial and subsequent configuration of
 such a device is mainly based on self-configuration and is triggered
 by the device itself.
 The gateway might be in charge of filtering and aggregating the data
 received from the device as the information sent by the device might
 be mostly redundant.

3. Device Life Cycle

 Since constrained devices deployed in a network might go through
 multiple phases in their lifetime, it is possible for different
 managers of networks and/or devices to exist during different parts
 of the device lifetimes.  An in-depth discussion regarding the
 possible device life cycles can be found in [IOT-SEC].

3.1. Manufacturing and Initial Testing

 Typically, the life cycle of a device begins at the manufacturing
 stage.  During this phase, the manufacturer of the device is
 responsible for the management and configuration of the devices.  It
 is also possible that a certain use case might utilize multiple types
 of constrained devices (e.g., temperature sensors, lighting
 controllers, etc.) and these could be manufactured by different
 entities.  As such, during the manufacturing stage, different
 managers can exist for different devices.  Similarly, during the
 initial testing phase, where device quality-assurance tasks might be
 performed, the manufacturer remains responsible for the management of
 devices and networks that might comprise them.

3.2. Installation and Configuration

 The responsibility of managing the devices must be transferred to the
 installer during the installation phase.  There must exist procedures
 for transferring management responsibility between the manufacturer
 and installer.  The installer may be the customer or an intermediary
 contracted to set up the devices and their networks.  It is important
 that the NMS that is utilized allows devices originating at different
 vendors to be managed, ensuring interoperability between them and the
 configuration of trust relationships between them as well.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 6] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 It is possible that the installation and configuration
 responsibilities might lie with different entities.  For example, the
 installer of a device might only be responsible for cabling a
 network, physically installing the devices, and ensuring initial
 network connectivity between them (e.g., configuring IP addresses).
 Following such an installation, the customer or a subcontractor might
 actually configure the operation of the device.  As such, during
 installation and configuration multiple parties might be responsible
 for managing a device and appropriate methods must be available to
 ensure that this management responsibility is transferred suitably.

3.3. Operation and Maintenance

 At the outset of the operation phase, the operational responsibility
 of a device and network should be passed on to the customer.  It is
 possible that the customer, however, might contract the maintenance
 of the devices and network to a subcontractor.  In this case, the NMS
 and management protocol should allow for configuring different levels
 of access to the devices.  Since different maintenance vendors might
 be used for devices that perform different functions (e.g., HVAC,
 lighting, etc.), it should also be possible to restrict management
 access to devices based on the currently responsible manager.

3.4. Recommissioning and Decommissioning

 The owner of a device might choose to replace, repurpose, or even
 decommission it.  In each of these cases, either the customer or the
 contracted maintenance agency must ensure that appropriate steps are
 taken to meet the end goal.
 In case the devices needs to be replaced, the manager of the network
 (customer or contractor responsible) must detach the device from the
 network, remove all appropriate configuration, and discard the
 device.  A new device must then be configured to replace it.  The NMS
 should allow for the transferring of the configuration and replacing
 an existing device.  The management responsibility of the operation/
 maintenance manager would end once the device is removed from the
 network.  During the installation of the new replacement device, the
 same responsibilities would apply as those during the Installation
 and Configuration phases.
 The device being replaced may not have yet reached end-of-life, and
 as such, instead of being discarded, it may be installed in a new
 location.  In this case, the management responsibilities are once
 again resting in the hands of the entities responsible for the
 Installation and Configuration phases at the new location.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 7] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 If a device is repurposed, then it is possible that the management
 responsibility for this device changes as well.  For example, a
 device might be moved from one building to another.  In this case,
 the managers responsible for devices and networks in each building
 could be different.  As such, the NMS must not only allow for
 changing configuration but also the transferring of management
 responsibilities.
 In case a device is decommissioned, the management responsibility
 typically ends at that point.

4. Use Cases

4.1. Environmental Monitoring

 Environmental monitoring applications are characterized by the
 deployment of a number of sensors to monitor emissions, water
 quality, or even the movements and habits of wildlife.  Other
 applications in this category include earthquake or tsunami early-
 warning systems.  The sensors often span a large geographic area;
 they can be mobile; and they are often difficult to replace.
 Furthermore, the sensors are usually not protected against tampering.
 Management of environmental-monitoring applications is largely
 concerned with monitoring whether the system is still functional and
 the roll out of new constrained devices in case the system loses too
 much of its structure.  The constrained devices themselves need to be
 able to establish connectivity (autoconfiguration), and they need to
 be able to deal with events such as losing neighbors or being moved
 to other locations.
 Management responsibility typically rests with the organization
 running the environmental-monitoring application.  Since these
 monitoring applications must be designed to tolerate a number of
 failures, the time scale for detecting and recording failures is, for
 some of these applications, likely measured in hours and repairs
 might easily take days.  In fact, in some scenarios it might be more
 cost- and time-effective not to repair such devices at all.  However,
 for certain environmental monitoring applications, much tighter time
 scales may exist and might be enforced by regulations (e.g.,
 monitoring of nuclear radiation).
 Since many applications of environmental-monitoring sensors are
 likely to be in areas that are important to safety (flood monitoring,
 nuclear radiation monitoring, etc.), it is important for management
 protocols and NMSs to ensure appropriate security protections.  These
 protections include not only access control, integrity, and

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 8] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 availability of data, but also provide appropriate mechanisms that
 can deal with situations that might be categorized as emergencies or
 when tampering with sensors/data might be detected.

4.2. Infrastructure Monitoring

 Infrastructure monitoring is concerned with the monitoring of
 infrastructures such as bridges, railway tracks, or (offshore)
 windmills.  The primary goal is usually to detect any events or
 changes of the structural conditions that can impact the risk and
 safety of the infrastructure being monitored.  Another secondary goal
 is to schedule repair and maintenance activities in a cost-effective
 manner.
 The infrastructure to monitor might be in a factory or spread over a
 wider area (but difficult to access).  As such, the network in use
 might be based on a combination of fixed and wireless technologies,
 which use robust networking equipment and support reliable
 communication via application-layer transactions.  It is likely that
 constrained devices in such a network are mainly C2 devices [RFC7228]
 and have to be controlled centrally by an application running on a
 server.  In case such a distributed network is widely spread, the
 wireless devices might use diverse long-distance wireless
 technologies such as Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access
 (WiMAX) or 3G/LTE.  In cases, where an in-building network is
 involved, the network can be based on Ethernet or wireless
 technologies suitable for in-building use.
 The management of infrastructure monitoring applications is primarily
 concerned with the monitoring of the functioning of the system.
 Infrastructure monitoring devices are typically rolled out and
 installed by dedicated experts, and updates are rare since the
 infrastructure itself does not change often.  However, monitoring
 devices are often deployed in unsupervised environments; hence,
 special attention must be given to protecting the devices from being
 modified.
 Management responsibility typically rests with the organization
 owning the infrastructure or responsible for its operation.  The time
 scale for detecting and recording failures is likely measured in
 hours and repairs might easily take days.  However, certain events
 (e.g., natural disasters) may require that status information be
 obtained much more quickly and that replacements of failed sensors
 can be rolled out quickly (or redundant sensors are activated
 quickly).  In case the devices are difficult to access, a self-
 healing feature on the device might become necessary.  Since
 infrastructure monitoring is closely related to ensuring safety,

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 9] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 management protocols and systems must provide appropriate security
 protections to ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of
 data.

4.3. Industrial Applications

 Industrial Applications and smart manufacturing refer to tasks such
 as networked control and monitoring of manufacturing equipment, asset
 and situation management, or manufacturing process control.  For the
 management of a factory, it is becoming essential to implement smart
 capabilities.  From an engineering standpoint, industrial
 applications are intelligent systems enabling rapid manufacturing of
 new products, dynamic response to product demands, and real-time
 optimization of manufacturing production and supply-chain networks.
 Potential industrial applications (e.g., for smart factories and
 smart manufacturing) are:
 o  Digital control systems with embedded, automated process controls;
    operator tools; and service information systems optimizing plant
    operations and safety.
 o  Asset management using predictive maintenance tools, statistical
    evaluation, and measurements maximizing plant reliability.
 o  Smart sensors detecting anomalies to avoid abnormal or
    catastrophic events.
 o  Smart systems integrated within the industrial energy-management
    system and externally with the smart grid enabling real-time
    energy optimization.
 Management of Industrial Applications and smart manufacturing may, in
 some situations, involve Building Automation tasks such as control of
 energy, HVAC, lighting, or access control.  Interacting with
 management systems from other application areas might be important in
 some cases (e.g., environmental monitoring for electric energy
 production, energy management for dynamically scaling manufacturing,
 vehicular networks for mobile asset tracking).  Management of
 constrained devices and networks may not only refer to the management
 of their network connectivity.  Since the capabilities of constrained
 devices are limited, it is quite possible that a management system
 would even be required to configure, monitor, and operate the primary
 functions for which a constrained device is utilized, besides
 managing its network connectivity.
 Sensor networks are an essential technology used for smart
 manufacturing.  Measurements, automated controls, plant optimization,
 health and safety management, and other functions are provided by a

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 10] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 large number of networked sectors.  Data interoperability and
 seamless exchange of product, process, and project data are enabled
 through interoperable data systems used by collaborating divisions or
 business systems.  Intelligent automation and learning systems are
 vital to smart manufacturing, but they must be effectively integrated
 with the decision environment.  The NMS utilized must ensure timely
 delivery of sensor data to the control unit so it may take
 appropriate decisions.  Similarly, the relaying of commands must also
 be monitored and managed to ensure optimal functioning.  Wireless
 sensor networks (WSNs) have been developed for machinery Condition-
 based Maintenance (CBM) as they offer significant cost savings and
 enable new functionalities.  Inaccessible locations, rotating
 machinery, hazardous areas, and mobile assets can be reached with
 wireless sensors.  Today, WSNs can provide wireless link reliability,
 real-time capabilities, and quality-of-service and they can enable
 industrial and related wireless sense and control applications.
 Management of industrial and factory applications is largely focused
 on monitoring whether the system is still functional, real-time
 continuous performance monitoring, and optimization as necessary.
 The factory network might be part of a campus network or connected to
 the Internet.  The constrained devices in such a network need to be
 able to establish configuration themselves (autoconfiguration) and
 might need to deal with error conditions as much as possible locally.
 Access control has to be provided with multi-level administrative
 access and security.  Support and diagnostics can be provided through
 remote monitoring access centralized outside of the factory.
 Factory-automation tasks require that continuous monitoring be used
 to optimize production.  Groups of manufacturing and monitoring
 devices could be defined to establish relationships between them.  To
 ensure timely optimization of processes, commands from the NMS must
 arrive at all destination within an appropriate duration.  This
 duration could change based on the manufacturing task being
 performed.  Installation and operation of factory networks have
 different requirements.  During the installation phase, many
 networks, usually distributed along different parts of the factory/
 assembly line, coexist without a connection to a common backbone.  A
 specialized installation tool is typically used to configure the
 functions of different types of devices, in different factory
 locations, in a secure manner.  At the end of the installation phase,
 interoperability between these stand-alone networks and devices must
 be enabled.  During the operation phase, these stand-alone networks
 are connected to a common backbone so that they may retrieve control
 information from and send commands to appropriate devices.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 11] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 Management responsibility is typically owned by the organization
 running the industrial application.  Since the monitoring
 applications must handle a potentially large number of failures, the
 time scale for detecting and recording failures is, for some of these
 applications, likely measured in minutes.  However, for certain
 industrial applications, much tighter time scales may exist, e.g., in
 real-time, which might be enforced by the manufacturing process or
 the use of critical material.  Management protocols and NMSs must
 ensure appropriate access control since different users of industrial
 control systems will have varying levels of permissions.  For
 example, while supervisors might be allowed to change production
 parameters, they should not be allowed to modify the functional
 configuration of devices like a technician should.  It is also
 important to ensure integrity and availability of data since
 malfunctions can potentially become safety issues.  This also implies
 that management systems must be able to react to situations that may
 pose dangers to worker safety.

4.4. Energy Management

 The EMAN working group developed an energy-management framework
 [RFC7326] for devices and device components within or connected to
 communication networks.  This document observes that one of the
 challenges of energy management is that a power distribution network
 is responsible for the supply of energy to various devices and
 components, while a separate communication network is typically used
 to monitor and control the power distribution network.  Devices in
 the context of energy management can be monitored for parameters like
 power, energy, demand and power quality.  If a device contains
 batteries, they can be also monitored and managed.
 Energy devices differ in complexity and may include basic sensors or
 switches, specialized electrical meters, or power distribution units
 (PDU), and subsystems inside the network devices (routers, network
 switches) or home or industrial appliances.  The operators of an
 energy-management system are either the utility providers or
 customers that aim to control and reduce the energy consumption and
 the associated costs.  The topology in use differs and the deployment
 can cover areas from small surfaces (individual homes) to large
 geographical areas.  The EMAN requirements document [RFC6988]
 discusses the requirements for energy management concerning
 monitoring and control functions.
 It is assumed that energy management will apply to a large range of
 devices of all classes and networks topologies.  Specific resource
 monitoring, like battery utilization and availability, may be
 specific to devices with lower physical resources (device classes C0
 or C1 [RFC7228]).

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 12] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 Energy management is especially relevant to the Smart Grid.  A Smart
 Grid is an electrical grid that uses data networks to gather and act
 on energy and power-related information in an automated fashion with
 the goal to improve the efficiency, reliability, economics, and
 sustainability of the production and distribution of electricity.
 Smart Metering is a good example of an energy-management application
 based on Smart Grid.  Different types of possibly wireless small
 meters all together produce a large amount of data, which is
 collected by a central entity and processed by an application server,
 which may be located within the customer's residence or off site in a
 data center.  The communication infrastructure can be provided by a
 mobile network operator as the meters in urban areas will most likely
 have a cellular or WiMAX radio.  In case the application server is
 located within the residence, such meters are more likely to use
 Wi-Fi protocols to interconnect with an existing network.
 An Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) network is another example
 of the Smart Grid that enables an electric utility to retrieve
 frequent electric usage data from each electric meter installed at a
 customer's home or business.  Unlike Smart Metering, in which case
 the customer or their agents install appliance-level meters, an AMI
 is typically managed by the utility providers and could also include
 other distribution automation devices like transformers and
 reclosers.  Meters in AMI networks typically contain constrained
 devices that connect to mesh networks with a low-bandwidth radio.
 Usage data and outage notifications can be sent by these meters to
 the utility's headend systems, via aggregation points of higher-end
 router devices that bridge the constrained network to a less
 constrained network via cellular, WiMAX, or Ethernet.  Unlike meters,
 these higher-end devices might be installed on utility poles owned
 and operated by a separate entity.
 It thereby becomes important for a management application not only to
 be able to work with diverse types of devices, but also to work over
 multiple links that might be operated and managed by separate
 entities, each having divergent policies for their own devices and
 network segments.  During management operations, like firmware
 updates, it is important that the management systems perform robustly
 in order to avoid accidental outages of critical power systems that
 could be part of AMI networks.  In fact, since AMI networks must also
 report on outages, the management system might have to manage the
 energy properties of battery-operated AMI devices themselves as well.
 A management system for home-based Smart Metering solutions is likely
 to have devices laid out in a simple topology.  However, AMI network
 installations could have thousands of nodes per router, i.e., higher-
 end device, which organize themselves in an ad hoc manner.  As such,

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 13] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 a management system for AMI networks will need to discover and
 operate over complex topologies as well.  In some situations, it is
 possible that the management system might also have to set up and
 manage the topology of nodes, especially critical routers.
 Encryption-key management and sharing in both types of networks are
 also likely to be important for providing confidentiality for all
 data traffic.  In AMI networks, the key may be obtained by a meter
 only after an end-to-end authentication process based on
 certificates.  The Smart Metering solution could adopt a similar
 approach or the security may be implied due to the encrypted Wi-Fi
 networks they become part of.
 The management of such a network requires end-to-end management of
 and information exchange through different types of networks.
 However, as of today, there is no integrated energy-management
 approach and no common information model available.  Specific energy-
 management applications or network islands use their own management
 mechanisms.

4.5. Medical Applications

 Constrained devices can be seen as an enabling technology for
 advanced and possibly remote health-monitoring and emergency-
 notification systems, ranging from monitors for blood pressure and
 heart rate to advanced devices capable of monitoring implanted
 technologies, such as pacemakers or advanced hearing aids.  Medical
 sensors may not only be attached to human bodies, they might also
 exist in the infrastructure used by humans such as bathrooms or
 kitchens.  Medical applications will also be used to ensure
 treatments are being applied properly, and they might guide people
 losing orientation.  Fitness and wellness applications, such as
 connected scales or wearable heart monitors, encourage consumers to
 exercise and empower self-monitoring of key fitness indicators.
 Different applications use Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or ZigBee connections to
 access the patient's smartphone or home cellular connection to access
 the Internet.
 Constrained devices that are part of medical applications are managed
 either by the users of those devices or by an organization providing
 medical (monitoring) services for physicians.  In the first case,
 management must be automatic and/or easy to install and set up by
 laypeople.  In the second case, it can be expected that devices will
 be controlled by specially trained people.  In both cases, however,
 it is crucial to protect the safety and privacy of the people who use
 medical devices.  Security precautions to protect access
 (authentication, encryption, integrity protections, etc.) to such
 devices may be critical to safeguarding the individual.  The level of
 access granted to different users also may need to be regulated.  For

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 14] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 example, an authorized surgeon or doctor must be allowed to configure
 all necessary options on the devices; however, a nurse or technician
 may only be allowed to retrieve data that can assist in diagnosis.
 Even though the data collected by a heart monitor might be protected,
 the pure fact that someone carries such a device may need protection.
 As such, certain medical appliances may not want to participate in
 discovery and self-configuration protocols in order to remain
 invisible.
 Many medical devices are likely to be used (and relied upon) to
 provide data to physicians in critical situations in which the
 patient might not be able to report such data themselves.  Timely
 delivery of data can be quite important in certain applications like
 patient-mobility monitoring in nursing homes.  Data must reach the
 physician and/or emergency services within specified limits of time
 in order to be useful.  As such, fault detection of the communication
 network or the constrained devices becomes a crucial function of the
 management system that must be carried out with high reliability and,
 depending on the medical appliance and its application, within
 seconds.

4.6. Building Automation

 Building automation comprises the distributed systems designed and
 deployed to monitor and control the mechanical, electrical, and
 electronic systems inside buildings with various destinations (e.g.,
 public and private, industrial, institutions, or residential).
 Advanced Building Automation Systems (BASs) may be deployed
 concentrating the various functions of safety, environmental control,
 occupancy, and security.  Increasingly, the deployment of the various
 functional systems is connected to the same communication
 infrastructure (possibly IP-based), which may involve wired or
 wireless communication networks inside the building.
 Building automation requires the deployment of a large number (10 to
 100,000) of sensors that monitor the status of devices, parameters
 inside the building, and controllers with different specialized
 functionality for areas within the building or the totality of the
 building.  Inter-node distances between neighboring nodes vary from 1
 to 20 meters.  The NMS must, as a result, be able to manage and
 monitor a large number of devices, which may be organized in multi-
 hop meshed networks.  Distances between the nodes, and the use of
 constrained protocols, means that networks of nodes might be
 segmented.  The management of such network segments and nodes in
 these segments should be possible.  Contrary to home automation, in
 building management the devices are expected to be managed assets and
 known to a set of commissioning tools and a data storage, such that
 every connected device has a known origin.  This requires the

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 15] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 management system to be able to discover devices on the network and
 ensure that the expected list of devices is currently matched.
 Management here includes verifying the presence of the expected
 devices and detecting the presence of unwanted devices.
 Examples of functions performed by controllers in building automation
 are regulating the quality, humidity, and temperature of the air
 inside the building as well as regulating the lighting.  Other
 systems may report the status of the machinery inside the building
 like elevators or inside the rooms like projectors in meeting rooms.
 Security cameras and sensors may be deployed and operated on separate
 dedicated infrastructures connected to the common backbone.  The
 deployment area of a BAS is typically inside one building (or part of
 it) or several buildings geographically grouped in a campus.  A
 building network can be composed of network segments, where a network
 segment covers a floor, an area on the floor, or a given
 functionality (e.g., security cameras).  It is possible that the
 management tasks of different types of some devices might be
 separated from others (e.g, security cameras might operate and be
 managed via a network separate from that of the HVAC in a building).
 Some of the sensors in BASs (for example, fire alarms or security
 systems) register, record, and transfer critical alarm information;
 therefore, they must be resilient to events like loss of power or
 security attacks.  A management system must be able to deal with
 unintentional segmentation of networks due to power loss or channel
 unavailability.  It must also be able to detect security events.  Due
 to specific operating conditions required from certain devices, there
 might be a need to certify components and subsystems operating in
 such constrained conditions based on specific requirements.  Also, in
 some environments, the malfunctioning of a control system (like
 temperature control) needs to be reported in the shortest possible
 time.  Complex control systems can misbehave, and their critical
 status reporting and safety algorithms need to be basic and robust
 and perform even in critical conditions.  Providing this monitoring,
 configuration and notification service is an important task of the
 management system used in building automation.
 In some cases, building automation solutions are deployed in newly
 designed buildings; in other cases, it might be over existing
 infrastructures.  In the first case, there is a broader range of
 possible solutions, which can be planned for the infrastructure of
 the building.  In the second case, the solution needs to be deployed
 over an existing infrastructure taking into account factors like
 existing wiring, distance limitations, and the propagation of radio
 signals over walls and floors, thereby making deployment difficult.
 As a result, some of the existing WLAN solutions (e.g., [IEEE802.11]
 or [IEEE802.15]) may be deployed.  In mission-critical or security-

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 16] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 sensitive environments and in cases where link failures happen often,
 topologies that allow for reconfiguration of the network and
 connection continuity may be required.  Some of the sensors deployed
 in building automation may be very simple constrained devices for
 which C0 or C1 [RFC7228] may be assumed.
 For lighting applications, groups of lights must be defined and
 managed.  Commands to a group of light must arrive within 200 ms at
 all destinations.  The installation and operation of a building
 network has different requirements.  During the installation, many
 stand-alone networks of a few to 100 nodes coexist without a
 connection to the backbone.  During this phase, the nodes are
 identified with a network identifier related to their physical
 location.  Devices are accessed from an installation tool to connect
 them to the network in a secure fashion.  During installation, the
 setting of parameters of common values to enable interoperability may
 be required.  During operation, the networks are connected to the
 backbone while maintaining the network identifier to physical
 location relation.  Network parameters like address and name are
 stored in the DNS.  The names can assist in determining the physical
 location of the device.
 It is also important for a building automation NMS to take safety and
 security into account.  Ensuring privacy and confidentiality of data,
 such that unauthorized parties do not get access to it, is likely to
 be important since users' individual behaviors could be potentially
 understood via their settings.  Appropriate security considerations
 for authorization and access control to the NMS is also important
 since different users are likely to have varied levels of operational
 permissions in the system.  For example, while end users should be
 able to control lighting systems, HVAC systems, etc., only qualified
 technicians should be able to configure parameters that change the
 fundamental operation of a device.  It is also important for devices
 and the NMS to be able to detect and report any tampering they might
 find, since these could lead to potential user safety concerns, e.g.,
 if sensors controlling air quality are tampered with such that the
 levels of carbon monoxide become life threatening.  This implies that
 an NMS should also be able to deal with and appropriately prioritize
 situations that might potentially lead to safety concerns.

4.7. Home Automation

 Home automation includes the control of lighting, heating,
 ventilation, air conditioning, appliances, entertainment and home
 security devices to improve convenience, comfort, energy efficiency,
 and safety.  It can be seen as a residential extension of building
 automation.  However, unlike a BAS, the infrastructure in a home is
 operated in a considerably more ad hoc manner.  While in some

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 17] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 installations it is likely that there is no centralized management
 system akin to a BAS available, in other situations outsourced and
 cloud-based systems responsible for managing devices in the home
 might be used.
 Home-automation networks need a certain amount of configuration
 (associating switches or sensors to actuators) that is either
 provided by electricians deploying home-automation solutions, by
 third-party home-automation service providers (e.g., small
 specialized companies or home-automation device manufacturers) or by
 residents by using the application user interface provided by home-
 automation devices to configure (parts of) the home-automation
 solution.  Similarly, failures may be reported via suitable
 interfaces to residents or they might be recorded and made available
 to services providers in charge of the maintenance of the home-
 automation infrastructure.
 The management responsibility either lies with the residents or is
 outsourced to electricians and/or third parties providing management
 of home-automation solutions as a service.  A varying combination of
 electricians, service providers, or the residents may be responsible
 for different aspects of managing the infrastructure.  The time scale
 for failure detection and resolution is, in many cases, likely
 counted in hours to days.

4.8. Transport Applications

 "Transport application" is a generic term for the integrated
 application of communications, control, and information processing in
 a transportation system.  "Transport telematics" and "vehicle
 telematics" are both used as terms for the group of technologies that
 support transportation systems.  Transport applications running on
 such a transportation system cover all modes of the transport and
 consider all elements of the transportation system, i.e. the vehicle,
 the infrastructure, and the driver or user, interacting together
 dynamically.  Examples for transport applications are inter- and
 intra-vehicular communication, smart traffic control, smart parking,
 electronic toll-collection systems, logistic and fleet management,
 vehicle control, and safety and roadside assistance.
 As a distributed system, transport applications require an end-to-end
 management of different types of networks.  It is likely that
 constrained devices in a network (e.g., a moving in-car network) have
 to be controlled by an application running on an application server
 in the network of a service provider.  Such a highly distributed
 network including cellular devices on vehicles is assumed to include
 a wireless access network using diverse long-distance wireless
 technologies such as WiMAX, 3G/LTE, or satellite communication, e.g.,

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 18] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 based on an embedded hardware module.  As a result, the management of
 constrained devices in the transport system might be necessary to
 plan top-down and might need to use data models obliged from and
 defined on the application layer.  The assumed device classes in use
 are mainly C2 [RFC7228] devices.  In cases, where an in-vehicle
 network is involved, C1 devices [RFC7228] with limited capabilities
 and a short-distance constrained radio network, e.g., IEEE 802.15.4
 might be used additionally.
 All Transport Applications will require an IT infrastructure to run
 on top of, e.g., in public-transport scenarios like trains, buses, or
 metro networks infrastructure might be provided, maintained, and
 operated by third parties like mobile-network or satellite-network
 operators.  However, the management responsibility of the transport
 application typically rests within the organization running the
 transport application (in the public-transport scenario, this would
 typically be the public-transport operator).  Different aspects of
 the infrastructure might also be managed by different entities.  For
 example, the in-car devices are likely to be installed and managed by
 the manufacturer, while the local government or transportation
 authority might be responsible for the on-road vehicular
 communication infrastructure used by these devices.  The backend
 infrastructure is also likely to be maintained by third-party
 operators.  As such, the NMS must be able to deal with different
 network segments (each being operated and controlled by separate
 entities) and enable appropriate access control and security.
 Depending on the type of application domain (vehicular or stationary)
 and service being provided, it is important for the NMS to be able to
 function with different architectures, since different manufacturers
 might have their own proprietary systems relying on a specific
 management topology option, as described in [RFC7547].  Moreover,
 constituents of the network can either be private, belong to
 individuals or private companies, or be owned by public institutions
 leading to different legal and organization requirements.  Across the
 entire infrastructure, a variety of constrained devices is likely to
 be used, and they must be individually managed.  The NMS must be able
 to either work directly with different types of devices or have the
 ability to interoperate with multiple different systems.
 The challenges in the management of vehicles in a mobile-transport
 application are manifold.  The up-to-date position of each node in
 the network should be reported to the corresponding management
 entities, since the nodes could be moving within or roaming between
 different networks.  Secondly, a variety of troubleshooting
 information, including sensitive location information, needs to be
 reported to the management system in order to provide accurate
 service to the customer.  Management systems dealing with mobile

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 19] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 nodes could possibly exploit specific patterns in the mobility of the
 nodes.  These patterns emerge due to repetitive vehicular usage in
 scenarios like people commuting to work and supply vehicles
 transporting shipments between warehouses, etc.  The NMS must also be
 able to handle partitioned networks, which would arise due to the
 dynamic nature of traffic resulting in large inter-vehicle gaps in
 sparsely populated scenarios.  Since mobile nodes might roam in
 remote networks, the NMS should be able to provide operating
 configuration updates regardless of node location.
 The constrained devices in a moving transport network might be
 initially configured in a factory, and a reconfiguration might be
 needed only rarely.  New devices might be integrated in an ad hoc
 manner based on self-management and self-configuration capabilities.
 Monitoring and data exchange might be necessary via a gateway entity
 connected to the backend transport infrastructure.  The devices and
 entities in the transport infrastructure need to be monitored more
 frequently and may be able to communicate with a higher data rate.
 The connectivity of such entities does not necessarily need to be
 wireless.  The time scale for detecting and recording failures in a
 moving transport network is likely measured in hours, and repairs
 might easily take days.  It is likely that a self-healing feature
 would be used locally.  On the other hand, failures in fixed
 transport-application infrastructure (e.g., traffic lights, digital-
 signage displays) are likely to be measured in minutes so as to avoid
 untoward traffic incidents.  As such, the NMS must be able to deal
 with differing timeliness requirements based on the type of devices.
 Since transport applications of the constrained devices and networks
 deal with automotive vehicles, malfunctions and misuse can
 potentially lead to safety concerns as well.  As such, besides access
 control, privacy of user data, and timeliness, management systems
 should also be able to detect situations that are potentially
 hazardous to safety.  Some of these situations could be automatically
 mitigated, e.g., traffic lights with incorrect timing, but others
 might require human intervention, e.g., failed traffic lights.  The
 management system should take appropriate actions in these
 situations.  Maintaining data confidentiality and integrity is also
 an important security aspect of a management system since tampering
 (or malfunction) can also lead to potentially dangerous situations.

4.9. Community Network Applications

 Community networks are comprised of constrained routers in a multi-
 hop mesh topology, communicating over lossy, and often wireless,
 channels.  While the routers are mostly non-mobile, the topology may
 be very dynamic because of fluctuations in link quality of the
 (wireless) channel caused by, e.g., obstacles, or other nearby radio

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 20] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 transmissions.  Depending on the routers that are used in the
 community network, the resources of the routers (memory, CPU) may be
 more or less constrained -- available resources may range from only a
 few kilobytes of RAM to several megabytes or more, and CPUs may be
 small and embedded, or more powerful general-purpose processors.
 Examples of such community networks are the FunkFeuer network
 (Vienna, Austria), FreiFunk (Berlin, Germany), Seattle Wireless
 (Seattle, USA), and AWMN (Athens, Greece).  These community networks
 are public and non-regulated, allowing their users to connect to each
 other and -- through an uplink to an ISP -- to the Internet.  No fee,
 other than the initial purchase of a wireless router, is charged for
 these services.  Applications of these community networks can be
 diverse, e.g., location-based services, free Internet access, file
 sharing between users, distributed chat services, social networking,
 video sharing, etc.
 As an example of a community network, the FunkFeuer network comprises
 several hundred routers, many of which have several radio interfaces
 (with omnidirectional and some directed antennas).  The routers of
 the network are small-sized wireless routers, such as the Linksys
 WRT54GL, available in 2011 for less than 50 euros.  Each router, with
 16 MB of RAM and 264 MHz of CPU power, is mounted on the rooftop of a
 user.  When a new user wants to connect to the network, they acquire
 a wireless router, install the appropriate firmware and routing
 protocol, and mount the router on the rooftop.  IP addresses for the
 router are assigned manually from a list of addresses (because of the
 lack of autoconfiguration standards for mesh networks in the IETF).
 While the routers are non-mobile, fluctuations in link quality
 require an ad hoc routing protocol that allows for quick convergence
 to reflect the effective topology of the network (such as
 Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP) [RFC6130] and Optimized Link
 State Routing version 2 (OLSRv2) [RFC7181] developed in the MANET
 WG).  Usually, no human interaction is required for these protocols,
 as all variable parameters required by the routing protocol are
 either negotiated in the control traffic exchange or are only of
 local importance to each router (i.e. do not influence
 interoperability).  However, external management and monitoring of an
 ad hoc routing protocol may be desirable to optimize parameters of
 the routing protocol.  Such an optimization may lead to a topology
 that is perceived to be more stable and to a lower control traffic
 overhead (and therefore to a higher delivery success ratio of data
 packets, a lower end-to-end delay, and less unnecessary bandwidth and
 energy use).

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 21] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 Different use cases for the management of community networks are
 possible:
 o  A single NMS, e.g., a border gateway providing connectivity to the
    Internet, requires managing or monitoring routers in the community
    network, in order to investigate problems (monitoring) or to
    improve performance by changing parameters (managing).  As the
    topology of the network is dynamic, constant connectivity of each
    router towards the management station cannot be guaranteed.
    Current network management protocols, such as SNMP and Network
    Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), may be used (e.g., use of
    interfaces such as the NHDP-MIB [RFC6779]).  However, when routers
    in the community network are constrained, existing protocols may
    require too many resources in terms of memory and CPU; and more
    importantly, the bandwidth requirements may exceed the available
    channel capacity in wireless mesh networks.  Moreover, management
    and monitoring may be unfeasible if the connection between the NMS
    and the routers is frequently interrupted.
 o  Distributed network monitoring, in which more than one management
    station monitors or manages other routers.  Because connectivity
    to a server cannot be guaranteed at all times, a distributed
    approach may provide a higher reliability, at the cost of
    increased complexity.  Currently, no IETF standard exists for
    distributed monitoring and management.
 o  Monitoring and management of a whole network or a group of
    routers.  Monitoring the performance of a community network may
    require more information than what can be acquired from a single
    router using a network management protocol.  Statistics, such as
    topology changes over time, data throughput along certain routing
    paths, congestion, etc., are of interest for a group of routers
    (or the routing domain) as a whole.  As of 2014, no IETF standard
    allows for monitoring or managing whole networks instead of single
    routers.

4.10. Field Operations

 The challenges of configuring and monitoring networks operated in the
 field by rescue and security agencies can be different from the other
 use cases since the requirements and operating conditions of such
 networks are quite different.
 With technology advancements, field networks operated nowadays are
 becoming large and can consist of a variety of different types of
 equipment that run different protocols and tools that obviously
 increase complexity of these mission-critical networks.  In many
 scenarios, configurations are, most likely, manually performed.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 22] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 Furthermore, some legacy and even modern devices do not even support
 IP networking.  A majority of protocols and tools developed by
 vendors that are being used are proprietary, which makes integration
 more difficult.
 The main reason for this disjoint operation scenario is that most
 equipment is developed with specific task requirements in mind,
 rather than interoperability of the varied equipment types.  For
 example, the operating conditions experienced by high altitude
 security equipment is significantly different from that used in
 desert conditions.  Similarly, equipment used in fire rescue has
 different requirements than flood-relief equipment.  Furthermore,
 interoperation of equipment with telecommunication equipment was not
 an expected outcome or (in some scenarios) may not even be desirable.
 Currently, field networks operate with a fixed Network Operations
 Center (NOC) that physically manages the configuration and evaluation
 of all field devices.  Once configured, the devices might be deployed
 in fixed or mobile scenarios.  Any configuration changes required
 would need to be appropriately encrypted and authenticated to prevent
 unauthorized access.
 Hierarchical management of devices is a common requirement in such
 scenarios since local managers or operators may need to respond to
 changing conditions within their purview.  The level of configuration
 management available at each hierarchy must also be closely governed.
 Since many field operation devices are used in hostile environments,
 a high failure and disconnection rate should be tolerated by the NMS,
 which must also be able to deal with multiple gateways and disjoint
 management protocols.
 Multi-national field operations involving search, rescue, and
 security are becoming increasingly common, requiring interoperation
 of a diverse set of equipment designed with different operating
 conditions in mind.  Furthermore, different intra- and inter-
 governmental agencies are likely to have a different set of
 standards, best practices, rules and regulations, and implementation
 approaches that may contradict or conflict with each other.  The NMS
 should be able to detect these and handle them in an acceptable
 manner, which may require human intervention.

5. Security Considerations

 This document discusses use cases for management of networks with
 constrained devices.  The security considerations described
 throughout the companion document [RFC7547] apply here as well.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 23] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

6. Informative References

 [RFC6130]  Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., and J. Dean, "Mobile Ad Hoc
            Network (MANET) Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)",
            RFC 6130, DOI 10.17487/RFC6130, April 2011,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6130>.
 [RFC6568]  Kim, E., Kaspar, D., and JP. Vasseur, "Design and
            Application Spaces for IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless
            Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)", RFC 6568,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC6568, April 2012,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6568>.
 [RFC6779]  Herberg, U., Cole, R., and I. Chakeres, "Definition of
            Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol",
            RFC 6779, DOI 10.17487/RFC6779, October 2012,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6779>.
 [RFC6988]  Quittek, J., Ed., Chandramouli, M., Winter, R., Dietz, T.,
            and B. Claise, "Requirements for Energy Management",
            RFC 6988, DOI 10.17487/RFC6988, September 2013,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6988>.
 [RFC7181]  Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Jacquet, P., and U. Herberg,
            "The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol Version 2",
            RFC 7181, DOI 10.17487/RFC7181, April 2014,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7181>.
 [RFC7228]  Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for
            Constrained-Node Networks", RFC 7228,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC7228, May 2014,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7228>.
 [RFC7326]  Parello, J., Claise, B., Schoening, B., and J. Quittek,
            "Energy Management Framework", RFC 7326,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC7326, September 2014,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7326>.
 [RFC7547]  Ersue, M., Ed., Romascanu, D., Schoenwaelder, J., and U.
            Herberg, "Management of Networks with Constrained Devices:
            Problem Statement and Requirements", RFC 7547,
            DOI 10.17487/RFC7547, May 2015,
            <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7547>.
 [IOT-SEC]  Garcia-Morchon, O., Kumar, S., Keoh, S., Hummen, R., and
            R. Struik, "Security Considerations in the IP-based
            Internet of Things", Work in Progress, draft-garcia-core-
            security-06, September 2013.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 24] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

 [IEEE802.11]
            IEEE, "Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC)
            and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications", IEEE Standard
            802.11, March 2012,
            <http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/802/802.11.html>.
 [IEEE802.15]
            IEEE, "WIRELESS PERSONAL AREA NETWORKS (PANs)", IEEE
            Standard 802.15, 2003-2014,
            <https://standards.ieee.org/about/get/802/802.15.html>.
 [IEEE802.15.4]
            IEEE, "Part 15.4: Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks
            (LR-WPANs)", IEEE Standard 802.15.4, September 2011,
            <https://standards.ieee.org/about/get/802/802.15.html>.

Acknowledgments

 The following persons reviewed and provided valuable comments during
 the creation of this document:
 Dominique Barthel, Carsten Bormann, Zhen Cao, Benoit Claise, Bert
 Greevenbosch, Ulrich Herberg, Ted Lemon, Kathleen Moriarty, James
 Nguyen, Zach Shelby, Peter van der Stok, and Martin Thomson.
 The authors would like to thank the reviewers and the participants on
 the Coman mailing list for their valuable contributions and comments.
 Juergen Schoenwaelder and Anuj Sehgal were partly funded by Flamingo,
 a Network of Excellence project (ICT-318488) supported by the
 European Commission under its Seventh Framework Programme.

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 25] RFC 7548 Constrained Management: Use Cases May 2015

Contributors

 The following persons made significant contributions to and reviewed
 this document:
 o  Ulrich Herberg contributed Section 4.9, "Community Network
    Applications".
 o  Peter van der Stok contributed to Section 4.6, "Building
    Automation".
 o  Zhen Cao contributed to Section 2.2, "Cellular Access
    Technologies".
 o  Gilman Tolle contributed Section 4.4 "Energy Management".
 o  James Nguyen and Ulrich Herberg contributed to Section 4.10 "Field
    Operations".

Authors' Addresses

 Mehmet Ersue (editor)
 Nokia Networks
 EMail: mehmet.ersue@nokia.com
 Dan Romascanu
 Avaya
 EMail: dromasca@avaya.com
 Juergen Schoenwaelder
 Jacobs University Bremen
 EMail: j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de
 Anuj Sehgal
 Jacobs University Bremen
 EMail: s.anuj@jacobs-university.de

Ersue, et al. Informational [Page 26]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc7548.txt · Last modified: 2015/05/13 22:44 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki