Hi: If we can get some rough consensus in this list I'll be happy to update the draft. Else, maybe we can ask the group in Stockholm?
Pascal >-----Original Message----- >From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: mercredi 24 juin 2009 22:45 >To: Richard Kelsey >Cc: Pascal Thubert (pthubert); [email protected] >Subject: Re: [6lowpan] piggybacked fragment ACKs > >> On the other hand, I can't >> find anything that explictly allows this. > >So it's not allowed in the current text. >I agree it would be easy to add. > >> Do you see any >> difficulty with piggybacking RFRAG-ACKs on other packets? > >That would mean my proposal to compress FRACKs by simply not sending >trailing zero bytes would not work. >Solution: >1) adopt another one of Pascal's recent proposals for FRACK >compression (A/B/B-reverse) >2) Simply don't compress the 32-bit field in the piggy-back case. > >Gruesse, Carsten _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
