Hi Esko, Thanks for your message!
(CC'ing the SCHC WG...) On Mon, 27 Oct 2025 at 12:18, Esko Dijk <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Carles, > > Agree with your responses! Coming back to one point: > > > - Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 >> In both cases, the second paragraph seems to repeat information from the >> 1st paragraph but slightly different. >> Is this intentional? If yes I can take a closer look to trying to >> understand this. If not intended, then I'll await new text. >> >> > Yes, this is intentional! > > This relates with SCHC architecture concepts, as follows. There is a SCHC > Stratum (atop 802.15.4 and below IPv6). There is only one SCHC Stratum > Header end point in either case. In the second case (Multiple-end point > networks), the SCHC Stratum Header indicates which is the SCHC Payload end > point used for C/D (e.g., so that a receiver knows how to decompress a > packet). Note that the SCHC Stratum Header itself is also compressed. In > the first case (Single-end point networks), there is only one possible SCHC > Payload end point. Conceptually, this is equivalent to the SCHC Stratum > Header being fully elided, and having a Rule to decompress the SCHC Stratum > Header implicitly known at the receiver. > > > I reread it now and it's clear: there was the difference in the stratum > header vs SCHC payloads. One question comes to mind here is whether this is > 802.15.4-specific, or not? Won't the same considerations apply to other > networks/technologies using SCHC? > My personal opinion is that this might well apply to any other technology, but it does not necessarily have to. Theoretically, there might be more than one SCHC Stratum end point atop the (L2?) technology. Something similar was discussed in a SCHC WG side-meeting in Madrid. (Perhaps this is unlikely in practice, anyway...) > And the terms like single-end point networks; multiple-end point networks. > > Agreed! We actually asked recently whether such terms should rather be defined in the SCHC architecture draft: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/schc/s48QrJnb8Ci6Tuy6QhcgxFrhiCQ We are awaiting a response, but perhaps we can anyway discuss this in Montreal. Cheers, Carles (as WG participant) Esko > > -- > *IoTconsultancy.nl* | Email/Teams: [email protected] | +31 6 > 2385 8339 > > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Libre de virus.www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
