



Internet Engineering Task Force                            M. Ersue, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                            Nokia Networks
Intended status: Informational                              D. Romascanu
Expires: September 2, 2015                                         Avaya
                                                        J. Schoenwaelder
                                                               A. Sehgal
                                                Jacobs University Bremen
                                                           March 1, 2015


       Management of Networks with Constrained Devices: Use Cases
                  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-05

Abstract

   This document discusses use cases concerning the management of
   networks, where 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".

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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 2, 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



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 1]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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 Lifecycle  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   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.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   7.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   8.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   9.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   Appendix A.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
     A.1.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-04 - draft-ietf-opsawg-
           coman-use-cases-05  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
     A.2.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-03 - draft-ietf-opsawg-
           coman-use-cases-04  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     A.3.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-02 - draft-ietf-opsawg-
           coman-use-cases-03  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     A.4.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-01 - draft-ietf-opsawg-
           coman-use-cases-02  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     A.5.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-00 - draft-ietf-opsawg-
           coman-use-cases-01  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
     A.6.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-03 - draft-ersue-opsawg-
           coman-use-cases-00  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
     A.7.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-02-03  . . . . . . . . . . .  28
     A.8.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-01-02  . . . . . . . . . . .  29



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 2]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


     A.9.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-00-01  . . . . . . . . . . .  30
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30

1.  Introduction

   Small devices with limited CPU, memory, and power resources, so
   called constrained devices (aka. sensor, smart object, or smart
   device) 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 non-constrained 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 send 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 elements that are
   needed to manage, processes the data, and presents them to the
   network management users.  Constrained devices, however, often have
   limited power, 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 type of challenges compared to the
   management of a traditional IP network.

   This document aims to understand use cases for the management of a
   network, where constrained devices are involved.  The document lists
   and discusses diverse use cases for the 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.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 3]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 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 [COM-REQ].

   This documents builds on the terminology defined in [RFC7228] and
   [COM-REQ].  [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 non-constrained 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 IEEE 802.15.4, DECT 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
   data-rate access technologies typically have small frame sizes.  So



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 4]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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 smart phone 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 IoT connectivity technologies including ZigBee and 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 by manifold
   type and size of devices matching to different device classes.  As
   such, the managing entity needs to be prepared to manage devices with
   diverse capabilities using different communication or management



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 5]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   protocols.  In case 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 Network Management System
   (NMS) run by the mobile operator.  Smart phones or embedded modules
   connected to a gateway might be themselves in charge to manage 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 Lifecycle

   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 lifecycles can be found in [IOT-SEC].

3.1.  Manufacturing and Initial Testing

   Typically, the lifecycle 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 setup the devices and their networks.  It is important
   that the NMS utilized allows devices originating at different vendors
   to be managed, ensuring interoperability between them and the
   configuration of trust relationships between them as well.

   It is possible that the installation and configuration
   responsibilities might lie with different entities.  For example, the



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 6]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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 sub-contractor
   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 sub-contractor.  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 transferring configuration from 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.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 7]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 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 transferring 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 the monitoring whether the system is still functional
   and the roll-out of new constrained devices in case the system looses
   too much of its structure.  The constrained devices themselves need
   to be able to establish connectivity (auto-configuration) and they
   need to be able to deal with events such as loosing 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 to not 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 network management systems (NMS) to ensure appropriate
   security protections.  These protections include not only access
   control, integrity and availability of data, but also provide



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 8]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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 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 usage.

   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 changes are rare since the
   infrastructure itself changes rarely.  However, monitoring devices
   are often deployed in unsupervised environments and 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,
   management protocols and systems must provide appropriate security




Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015               [Page 9]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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, as well as 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 (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning), 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 that
   a constrained device is utilized for, 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.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 10]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 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 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, relaying of commands must also be
   monitored and managed to ensure optimal functioning.  Wireless sensor
   networks (WSN) 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.  WSNs can provide today wireless link reliability, real-time
   capabilities, and quality-of-service and 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 (auto-configuration) 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, co-exist 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
   location, 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.

   Management responsibility is typically owned by the organization
   running the industrial application.  Since the monitoring



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 11]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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.  E.g., 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.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 12]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   Energy management is especially relevant to the Smart Grid.  A Smart
   Grid is an electrical grid that uses data networks to gather and to
   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 Smart Grid based energy
   management applications.  Different types of possibly wireless small
   meters produce all together 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 have most
   likely 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
   infrastructure 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 to not only
   be able to work with diverse types of devices, but also 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 system performs 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 networks
   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.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 13]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 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 setup and
   manage the topology of nodes, especially critical routers.
   Encryption key management and sharing in both types of networks is
   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.  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 blood pressure and heart rate
   monitors 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 setup by
   average people.  In the second case, it can be expected that devices
   be controlled by specially trained people.  In both cases, however,
   it is crucial to protect the safety and privacy of the people to
   which medical devices are attached.  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



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 14]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   regulated.  For 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 beat
   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 since the biggest
   market is likely elderly and handicapped people.  Timely delivery of
   data can be quite important in certain applications like patient
   mobility monitoring in old-age 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 (BAS) may be deployed
   concentrating the various functions of safety, environmental control,
   occupancy, security.  More and more the deployment of the various
   functional systems is connected to the same communication
   infrastructure (possibly Internet Protocol based), which may involve
   wired or wireless communications networks inside the building.

   Building automation requires the deployment of a large number
   (10-100.000) of sensors that monitor the status of devices, and
   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 between 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 management system to be able to discover devices on the



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 15]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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 and 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 separate network
   to the HVAC in a building).

   Some of the sensors in Building Automation Systems (for example fire
   alarms or security systems) register, record and transfer critical
   alarm information and therefore 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.

   Building automation solutions are deployed in some cases 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, the propagation of radio
   signals over walls and floors, thereby making deployment difficult.
   As a result, some of the existing WLAN solutions (e.g., IEEE 802.11
   or IEEE 802.15) may be deployed.  In mission-critical or security
   sensitive environments and in cases where link failures happen often,



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 16]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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 co-exist 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 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.  E.g., while end users should be able to
   control lighting systems, HVACs, 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 detect,
   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
   a 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 building automation system, the
   infrastructure in a home is operated in a considerably more ad-hoc
   manner.  While in some installations it is likely that there is no



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 17]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   centralized management system, akin to a Building Automation System
   (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 lies either with the residents or it
   may be 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 or vehicle telematics
   are used as a term 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 road 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.
   based on an embedded hardware module.  As a result, the management of



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 18]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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, bus or
   metro network 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 public works might be responsible for the
   on-road vehicular communication infrastructure used by these devices.
   The back-end 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
   as well.

   Depending on the type of application domain (vehicular or stationary)
   and service being provided, it would be 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 [COM-REQ].
   Moreover, constituents of the network can be either private,
   belonging to individuals or private companies, or owned by public
   institutions leading to different legal and organization
   requirements.  Across the entire infrastructure, a variety of
   constrained devices are likely to be used, and 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.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 19]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 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, logistics 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 -configuration capabilities.
   Monitoring and data exchange might be necessary to do via a gateway
   entity connected to the back-end transport infrastructure.  The
   devices and entities in the transport infrastructure need to be
   monitored more frequently and can 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) is 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 a 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



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 20]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   (wireless) channel caused by, e.g., obstacles, or other nearby radio
   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.  These routers,
   with 16 MB of RAM and 264 MHz of CPU power, are mounted on the
   rooftops of the users.  When new users want 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 auto-configuration 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 NHDP
   [RFC6130] and 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 more stable perceived topology 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 usage.

   Different use cases for the management of community networks are
   possible:




Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 21]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   o  One single Network Management Station, 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 NETCONF, may be used (e.g.,
      using 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 network management station 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 configuration and monitoring of 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 varieties 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.
   Furthermore, some legacy and even modern devices do not even support
   IP networking.  A majority of protocols and tools developed by



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 22]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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, search and rescue operations equipment
   used in case of fire rescue has different requirements than flood
   relief equipment.  Furthermore, inter-operation of equipment with
   telecommunication equipment was not an expected outcome or in some
   scenarios this 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 inter-operation 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 regulation, 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.  IANA Considerations

   This document does not introduce any new code-points or namespaces
   for registration with IANA.

   Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
   RFC.



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 23]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


6.  Security Considerations

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

7.  Contributors

   Following persons made significant contributions to and reviewed this
   document:

   o  Ulrich Herberg contributed the Section 4.9 on Community Network
      Applications.

   o  Peter van der Stok contributed to Section 4.6 on Building
      Automation.

   o  Zhen Cao contributed to Section 2.2 Cellular Access Technologies.

   o  Gilman Tolle contributed the Section 4.4 on Automated Metering
      Infrastructure.

   o  James Nguyen and Ulrich Herberg contributed to Section 4.10 on
      Military operations.

8.  Acknowledgments

   Following persons reviewed and provided valuable comments to
   different versions 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 editors would like to thank the reviewers and the participants on
   the Coman maillist for their valuable contributions and comments.

9.  Informative References

   [RFC6130]  Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., and J. Dean, "Mobile Ad Hoc
              Network (MANET) Neighborhood Discovery Protocol (NHDP)",
              RFC 6130, April 2011.

   [RFC6568]  Kim, E., Kaspar, D., and JP. Vasseur, "Design and
              Application Spaces for IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless
              Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)", RFC 6568, April 2012.





Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 24]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   [RFC6779]  Herberg, U., Cole, R., and I. Chakeres, "Definition of
              Managed Objects for the Neighborhood Discovery Protocol",
              RFC 6779, October 2012.

   [RFC6988]  Quittek, J., Chandramouli, M., Winter, R., Dietz, T., and
              B. Claise, "Requirements for Energy Management", RFC 6988,
              September 2013.

   [RFC7181]  Clausen, T., Dearlove, C., Jacquet, P., and U. Herberg,
              "The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol Version 2", RFC
              7181, April 2014.

   [RFC7228]  Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and A. Keranen, "Terminology for
              Constrained-Node Networks", RFC 7228, May 2014.

   [RFC7326]  Parello, J., Claise, B., Schoening, B., and J. Quittek,
              "Energy Management Framework", RFC 7326, September 2014.

   [COM-REQ]  Ersue, M., Romascanu, D., and J. Schoenwaelder,
              "Management of Networks with Constrained Devices: Problem
              Statement and Requirements", draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-
              probstate-reqs (work in progress), February 2014.

   [IOT-SEC]  Garcia-Morchon, O., Kumar, S., Keoh, S., Hummen, R., and
              R. Struik, "Security Considerations in the IP-based
              Internet of Things", draft-garcia-core-security-06 (work
              in progress), September 2013.

Appendix A.  Change Log

A.1.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-04 - draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-
      use-cases-05

   o  Added text regarding security and safety considerations to the
      Environmental Monitoring, Infrastructure Monitoring, Industrial
      Applications, Medical Applications, Building Automation and
      Transport Applications section.

   o  Adopted text as per comments received from Kathleen Moriarty
      during IESG review.

   o  Added security related text to use cases for addressing concerns
      raised by Ted Lemon during the IESG review.








Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 25]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


A.2.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-03 - draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-
      use-cases-04

   o  Resolved Gen-ART review comments received from Martin Thomson.

   o  Deleted company name for the list of contributors.

   o  Added Martin Thomson to Acknowledgments section.

A.3.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-02 - draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-
      use-cases-03

   o  Updated references to take into account RFCs that have now been
      published

   o  Added text to the access technologies section explaining why fixed
      line technologies (e.g., powerline communications) have not been
      discussed.

   o  Created a new section, Device Lifecycle, discussing the impact of
      different device lifecycle stages on the management of constrained
      networks.

   o  Homogenized usage of device classes to form C0, C1 and C2.

   o  Ensured consistency in usage of Wi-Fi, ZigBee and other
      terminologies.

   o  Added text clarifying the management aspects of the Building
      Automation and Industrial Automation use cases.

   o  Clarified the meaning of unreliability in context of constrained
      devices and networks.

   o  Added information regarding the configuration and operation of
      factory automation use case, based on the type of information
      provided in the building automation use case.

   o  Fixed editorial issues discovered by reviewers.

A.4.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-01 - draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-
      use-cases-02

   o  Renamed Mobile Access Technologies section to Cellular Access
      Technologies

   o  Changed references to mobile access technologies to now read
      cellular access technologies.



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 26]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   o  Added text to the introduction to point out that the list of use
      cases is not exhaustive since others unknown to the authors might
      exist.

   o  Updated references to take into account RFCs that have been now
      published.

   o  Updated Environmental Monitoring section to make it clear that in
      some scenarios it may not be prudent to repair devices.

   o  Added clarification in Infrastructure Monitoring section that
      reliable communication is achieved via application layer
      transactions

   o  Removed reference to Energy Devices from Energy Management
      section, instead labeling them as devices within the context of
      energy management.

   o  Reduced descriptive content in Energy Management section.

   o  Rewrote text in Energy Management section to highlight management
      characteristics of Smart Meter and AMI networks.

   o  Added text regarding timely delivery of information, and related
      management system characteristic, to the Medical Applications
      section

   o  Changed subnets to network segment in Building Automation section.

   o  Changed structure to infrastructure in Building Automation
      section, and added text to highlight associated deployment
      difficulties.

   o  Removed Trickle timer as example of common values to be set in
      Building Automation section.

   o  Added text regarding the possible availability of outsourced and
      cloud based management systems for Home Automation.

   o  Added text to Transport Applications section to highlight the
      requirement of IT infrastructure for such applications to function
      on top of.

   o  Merged the Transport Applications and Vehicular Networks section
      together.  Following changes to the Vehicular Networks section
      were merged back into Transport Applications





Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 27]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


      *  Replaced wireless last hops with wireless access to vehicles in
         Vehicular Networks.

      *  Expanded proprietary systems to "systems relying on a specific
         Management Topology Option, as described in [COM-REQ]." within
         Vehicular Networks section.

      *  Added text regarding mobility patterns to Vehicular Networks.

   o  Changed the Military Operations use case to Field Operations and
      edited the text to be suitable to such scenarios.

A.5.  draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-use-cases-00 - draft-ietf-opsawg-coman-
      use-cases-01

   o  Reordered some use cases to improve the flow.

   o  Added "Vehicular Networks".

   o  Shortened the Military Operations use case.

   o  Started adding substance to the security considerations section.

A.6.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-03 - draft-ersue-opsawg-coman-use-
      cases-00

   o  Reduced the terminology section for terminology addressed in the
      LWIG and Coman Requirements drafts.  Referenced the other drafts.

   o  Checked and aligned all terminology against the LWIG terminology
      draft.

   o  Spent some effort to resolve the intersection between the
      Industrial Application, Home Automation and Building Automation
      use cases.

   o  Moved section section 3.  Use Cases from the companion document
      [COM-REQ] to this draft.

   o  Reformulation of some text parts for more clarity.

A.7.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-02-03

   o  Extended the terminology section and removed some of the
      terminology addressed in the new LWIG terminology draft.
      Referenced the LWIG terminology draft.





Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 28]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   o  Moved Section 1.3. on Constrained Device Classes to the new LWIG
      terminology draft.

   o  Class of networks considering the different type of radio and
      communication technologies in use and dimensions extended.

   o  Extended the Problem Statement in Section 2. following the
      requirements listed in Section 4.

   o  Following requirements, which belong together and can be realized
      with similar or same kind of solutions, have been merged.

      *  Distributed Management and Peer Configuration,

      *  Device status monitoring and Neighbor-monitoring,

      *  Passive Monitoring and Reactive Monitoring,

      *  Event-driven self-management - Self-healing and Periodic self-
         management,

      *  Authentication of management systems and Authentication of
         managed devices,

      *  Access control on devices and Access control on management
         systems,

      *  Management of Energy Resources and Data models for energy
         management,

      *  Software distribution (group-based firmware update) and Group-
         based provisioning.

   o  Deleted the empty section on the gaps in network management
      standards, as it will be written in a separate draft.

   o  Added links to mentioned external pages.

   o  Added text on OMA M2M Device Classification in appendix.

A.8.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-01-02

   o  Extended the terminology section.

   o  Added additional text for the use cases concerning deployment
      type, network topology in use, network size, network capabilities,
      radio technology, etc.




Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 29]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   o  Added examples for device classes in a use case.

   o  Added additional text provided by Cao Zhen (China Mobile) for
      Mobile Applications and by Peter van der Stok for Building
      Automation.

   o  Added the new use cases 'Advanced Metering Infrastructure' and
      'MANET Concept of Operations in Military'.

   o  Added the section 'Managing the Constrainedness of a Device or
      Network' discussing the needs of very constrained devices.

   o  Added a note that the requirements in [COM-REQ] need to be seen as
      standalone requirements and the current document does not
      recommend any profile of requirements.

   o  Added a section in [COM-REQ] for the detailed requirements on
      constrained management matched to management tasks like fault,
      monitoring, configuration management, Security and Access Control,
      Energy Management, etc.

   o  Solved nits and added references.

   o  Added Appendix A on the related development in other bodies.

   o  Added Appendix B on the work in related research projects.

A.9.  draft-ersue-constrained-mgmt-00-01

   o  Splitted the section on 'Networks of Constrained Devices' into the
      sections 'Network Topology Options' and 'Management Topology
      Options'.

   o  Added the use case 'Community Network Applications' and 'Mobile
      Applications'.

   o  Provided a Contributors section.

   o  Extended the section on 'Medical Applications'.

   o  Solved nits and added references.

Authors' Addresses

   Mehmet Ersue (editor)
   Nokia Networks

   Email: mehmet.ersue@nsn.com



Ersue, et al.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 30]

Internet-Draft      Constrained Management: Use Cases         March 2015


   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.           Expires September 2, 2015              [Page 31]
