Hi Carles, Thank you for the draft, it shows that 6lo and SCHC can work together. I've few comments on the draft:
- NALP I don't think we should impose the size of the ruleID in 6lo header, for instance if a 6lo network is relaying a SCHC packet, it should know the rule size to fill the field. if it does not care, it just copy the SCHC packet after the NALP. I will be more in favor of a NALP of 1 byte long then the SCHC packet. We can specify some recommendations at it is currently done for LoRaWAN, Sigfox or PPP to carry SCHC packet over 6lo. - HC Could be nice to have a HC_SCHC which keeps IPv6 header compression with 6lo and allows route-over. Same as for NALP, the SCHC format decoding is done by SCHC. Laurent
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
