20  Storing vs Non-Storing Modes

routing
rpl
iot
Keywords

RPL routing modes, RPL storing mode, RPL non-storing mode, RPL source routing, RPL DAO

20.1 Start With the Downward Packet

RPL routing mode matters most when a packet must travel from the root toward a node. In storing mode, intermediate routers keep downward route state. In non-storing mode, the root carries more of the path information in the packet.

Start with that downward packet and ask where the route knowledge lives. The answer changes memory pressure, header overhead, repair behavior, troubleshooting evidence, and whether a deployment can support commands as confidently as it supports upward telemetry.

Overview: The Mode Decides Where Downward State Lives

RPL builds an upward routing structure toward a DODAG root. A device can usually send traffic upward by forwarding to its preferred parent. Storing and Non-Storing mode become important when traffic must move downward from the root or across the DODAG between non-root nodes.

The core question is route-state placement. In Storing mode, router-capable nodes keep downward routes for descendants. In Non-Storing mode, the root keeps the downward path view and uses source-route information for packets that travel down the DODAG.

That placement changes the evidence, not the need for evidence. Storing mode asks whether intermediate routers have current descendant entries and enough memory to keep them. Non-Storing mode asks whether the root has the current path view and whether the resulting source-route information fits the packet and link constraints.

Mode choice also depends on the application mix. A network that mostly uploads readings may tolerate a different proof burden than a control system that sends frequent commands to sleeping devices. The overview decision should name the traffic direction before treating either mode as simpler.

The safest overview record is a comparison, not a slogan. It names where state is stored, which nodes are allowed to store it, how DAO evidence is checked, what packet overhead is expected, and what event forces retesting after the first deployment.

When a design has both telemetry and commands, review the two directions separately. The mode can be acceptable for one direction while still needing extra evidence for the other.

That discipline keeps mode selection tied to observable route state instead of preference alone.

RPL routing modes summary contrasting storing mode, where each router keeps its own routing table for local hop-by-hop downward forwarding at higher memory cost, with non-storing mode, where the DODAG root uses source routing so nodes need no tables, trading memory savings for longer root-centric paths.
RPL routing mode changes where downward route state is kept, not whether routing evidence is needed.

Upward Traffic

Node-to-root traffic normally follows preferred parents. This direction often looks similar in both modes.

Storing Mode

Router-capable nodes store descendant reachability and may forward downward packets using local route entries.

Non-Storing Mode

The root maintains downward path knowledge and includes source-route information for downward packets.

Peer Traffic

Node-to-node traffic needs explicit path evidence. Do not assume it is short, root-free, or reliable from the mode name alone.

Review rule:

Do not choose a mode from node count alone. Name the traffic direction, route-state location, DAO evidence, packet-size behavior, and retest trigger before accepting the choice.

Practitioner: Write the Mode Choice as Evidence

A practitioner should turn the mode choice into a short review record. The record separates upward telemetry, downward commands, and peer flows because each direction exercises different route-state assumptions.

The record also names node roles. A root, router-capable intermediate node, and leaf-only node do not carry the same routing responsibility.

Add the refresh rule to the same record. Parent churn, root failover, node mobility, firmware changes, payload growth, and new command flows can all invalidate an older mode decision even when the topology picture still looks familiar.

RPL traffic directions showing upward parent forwarding, downward routing differences, and peer traffic path evidence.
Traffic direction determines which routing-mode evidence matters.

Mode Review Flow

1. Name the traffic Separate upward telemetry, downward commands, and peer exchanges before comparing modes.
2. Identify node roles Mark the root, router-capable nodes, sleepy or leaf-only nodes, and gateway boundaries.
3. Locate route state Record whether downward reachability is stored in intermediate routers or at the root.
4. Check control evidence Use DIO context and DAO reachability evidence to support the mode claim.
5. Test packets Prove the actual upward, downward, or peer path the application depends on.
Design Signal
Storing Pressure
Non-Storing Pressure
Evidence to Keep
Mostly upward telemetry
May not need much distributed downward state.
Can be attractive when downward traffic is limited and root evidence is reliable.
Upward packet traces, preferred-parent evidence, and command-path tests if commands exist.
Frequent root-to-node commands
Intermediate routers need correct descendant route state.
The root needs current path knowledge and source-route packet proof.
DAO evidence, downward packet samples, retry behavior, and stale-route handling.
Peer control loops
Local route state may help only if the required ancestor and route entries exist.
Peer paths may depend on the root's source-routing role.
Observed peer path, latency expectation, failure mode, and retest trigger.
Constrained packets
Route tables consume memory on router-capable nodes.
Source-route information consumes packet space on downward paths.
Route-table snapshots, packet-size checks, fragmentation risk, and owner of retesting.

Under the Hood: DAO and Packet Evidence Carry the Claim

DAO evidence supports downward reachability, but it is not the same as application delivery. It helps prove that the selected mode has route knowledge for a destination. Packet tests still have to show that the claimed traffic can move through the current topology.

Under the hood, Storing mode and Non-Storing mode put different stress on the system. Storing mode asks router-capable nodes to keep useful descendant state. Non-Storing mode asks the root to maintain the downward path view and fit source-route information into downward packets.

RPL Routing Modes Summary: Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RFC 6550), RPL PROTOCOL, STORING MODE, ROUTING TABLES, Each router maintains, its own routing table, DOWNWARD ROUTING, Local hop-by-hop, forwarding decisions
RPL Routing Modes Summary

Boundary Evidence

Boundary
What Can Break
Evidence Needed
Retest Trigger
DIO context
Nodes may join the wrong context, misunderstand the mode, or compare paths with stale assumptions.
Current DODAG context, Rank direction, Objective Function assumptions, and mode setting.
Root change, firmware change, Objective Function change, or topology reset.
DAO reachability
Downward route claims can be stale, missing, or stored at the wrong place for the selected mode.
DAO evidence for destinations, route-table snapshot or root path view, and route lifetime assumptions.
Parent churn, node movement, sleeping behavior, or route timeout.
Packet forwarding
Headers, source-route information, link limits, or fragmentation can undermine a path that looks valid in control evidence.
Sample upward, downward, and peer packets for the application traffic that matters.
Payload growth, security wrapper change, link setting change, or new traffic direction.
Operations ownership
Operators may know that traffic failed without knowing whether the root, router state, or link path is responsible.
Monitoring owner, troubleshooting path, stale-route policy, and escalation rule.
New gateway, new firmware, root failover, or repeated unexplained loss.
Common pitfall:

Do not treat DAO as proof of application success. DAO supports route knowledge; application delivery still needs packet evidence and receiver behavior.

Mode Acceptance Checklist

  • Name the traffic directions the application actually uses.
  • Record which nodes may store downward route state and which nodes remain leaf-only.
  • Keep DAO evidence and either router route tables or root path knowledge for the selected mode.
  • Check packet size and forwarding behavior for downward and peer paths, not just upward telemetry.
  • List retest triggers such as parent churn, root change, firmware update, payload growth, and topology changes.

20.2 Summary

  • RPL Storing and Non-Storing modes differ mainly in where downward route state lives.
  • Upward traffic toward the root usually follows preferred parents in both modes.
  • Storing mode lets router-capable nodes keep descendant reachability for downward forwarding.
  • Non-Storing mode places downward path responsibility at the root and uses source-route information.
  • Peer traffic and downward commands need explicit path evidence, not assumptions from the mode name.
  • A review record should keep traffic direction, node roles, DAO evidence, packet proof, and retest triggers together.

20.3 Key Takeaway

Choose an RPL routing mode by proving the route-state location and packet behavior for the traffic your application actually uses.

20.4 See Also