Hello René:

As a RPL editor I'd point out that RPL operates on any LLN, not only links 
running 6LoWPAN. So RPL cannot waste humongous space in the packets and then 
rely of 6LoWPAN to fix it.

RPL will have to do its own exercise and get as lean as possible; I admit 
there's a lot left to be done, in particular in source route and DAO, and that 
WILL be done. Whether 6LoWPAN can do more for its own context is left to be 
seen, and we can start a new draft for that purpose if such need is determined.

The real question is for me whether the HC draft as it stands enables future 
additions such as may be needed for RPL, or if it would stand on the way. For 
all I see, HC leaves the door open for additions in particular new headers such 
as the one RPL is considering for loop detection, so I do not see this draft as 
compromising RPL.

As you figure, there will always be additions that can be made, new types and 
header coming up, new transports to integrate. This draft is not intended to 
cover everything that will ever be compressed in 6LoWPAN and I hope/trust that 
additions will follow. Till then, there are implementations and deployments 
waiting for this draft to become RFC, and we need to move forward. I do support 
moving this work forward to IESG, see what they think.

Cheers,

Pascal


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Rene Struik
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 10:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] WGLC for 6lowpan HC draft

Hi Geoff:

When studying details of the RoLL protocol, a similar question as the one 
raised by Joseph Reddy came to mind: how are we going to ensure that all 
packets are not going to be as bulky as they seem right now (from rpl-6, it 
seems one may use tens of bytes in various packets, seemingly without any 
technical need). As I understood from the RPL Security conf call as of Tue Feb 
23, 2010, 12-1pm EST, compression of IPv6 packets is not in RoLL's charter and 
would be 6lowpan's responsibility. So, at this time, I would like this issue to 
be adequately addressed (if not 6lowpan, who is going to do this), prior to 
moving this forward to IESG.

Best regards, Rene

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Reddy, Joseph
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 2:02 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] WGLC for 6lowpan HC draft


 
Hi Geoff,

I do not support forwarding this doc to IESG yet. I would like the following 
issues addressed 

** Investigate possible TCP header compression scheme

** Explain strategy for compressing RPL headers ( I understand this could be 
done in the ROLL group, but I have not seen a definite statement either way )

** Resolve the "forward compatability" issue ( ideally, while maintaining 
backwards-comptability )


-Regards, Joseph



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:56:31 -0700
From: Geoff Mulligan <[email protected]>
Subject: [6lowpan] WGLC for 6lowpan HC draft
To: 6lowpan <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <1266047791.3643.48.ca...@dellx1>
Content-Type: text/plain

Folks,
  I realized that I have made a huge slip-up.  The HC draft has languished for 
the past few months.
At the meeting in Hiroshima we said that we would last call this draft, but I 
failed to send out the actual last call. So...

  This note formally starts the WG Last Call for comments on 
draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc-06, "Compression Format for IPv6 Datagrams in 6LoWPAN 
Networks".

The document can be found at:
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-6lowpan-hc-06.txt

The document is intended to be submitted by this Working Group to the IESG for 
publication as a Standards Track document.

Please review the document carefully (one last time), and send your comments to 
the 6lowpan list.  Please also indicate in your response whether or not you 
think this document is ready to go to the IESG.

Because of my gaffe this Last Call will end Wednesday February 24 2010 at 2359 
UTC.

        Thanks,
                Geoff





**************************************
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

Reply via email to