Hi Pascal,
I did not mean to link the two. HC should go to IESG as quickly as
possible. I was merely trying to state my opinions on how to move
forward with the fragment work, but only *after* we submit HC to
IESG. We presumably need to get the fragment work into a new charter
item anyway before we can start work on that.
Sorry for the confusion.
--
Jonathan Hui
On Mar 5, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
Hi Jonathan:
Unsure what you mean by "first". Does that relate to the fragment work
or is that linked to the HC work?
IOW do you agree with the plan to 1) move HC to IESG, and then 2) work
on fragments and all you listed below?
Pascal
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Hui [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 4:59 PM
To: Anders Brandt
Cc: Zach Shelby; Pascal Thubert (pthubert); [email protected]
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] closing on update to HC draft
I'm fine with keeping any fragmentation fixes to a separate doc. But
if we do
so, I'd prefer to first create a short draft that specifies the
baseline features I
outlined in a prior mail:
- Ability to ACK/NACK any 6lowpan packet (fragmented or not).
- Fragmentation makes no assumptions of the compression mechanism
above.
- Ability to carry arbitrary payloads in ACK/NACK.
- Carry 6lowpan packet sequence number/tag separate from MAC.
With that, we can specify other features as needed (e.g. SACK, etc.)
in
separate drafts.
--
Jonathan Hui
On Mar 5, 2010, at 4:31 AM, Anders Brandt wrote:
Zach, Pascal,
Anders - are you OK with doing further work in a separate
fragmentation document?
Sure.
- Anders
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Zach Shelby
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 12:48
To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] closing on update to HC draft
Pascal,
Got you, makes perfect sense. So let's just go with the:
"We could explicitly state, for clarity, that you MUST NOT compress
anything outside the first fragment"
Anders - are you OK with doing further work in a separate
fragmentation document?
Zach
On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:52 , Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
Hi Zach:
I do not mind working on Anders' suggestion at all. In fact
I strongly
support working on fragments and his proposal is a great start.
I do not mind publishing a draft that just has Anders'
proposal in it,
as long as we have a design and a clear roadmap for the rest of
the
fragment work where that proposal would fit - as opposed to have
to
deprecate it (again) 6 month from now.
What I think is that HC is not the right draft for that
proposal. HC
is about Header Compression. We won't get anywhere if we
keep changing
the scope or adding features to this draft - or any draft.
Pascal
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Zach Shelby
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 7:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] closing on update to HC draft
On Mar 4, 2010, at 14:09 , Carsten Bormann wrote:
We could explicitly state, for clarity, that you MUST
NOT compress
anything outside the first fragment,
That is a nice editorial clarification.
I'm in favor of adding that.
Yep, this is the minimum required.
Now we seem to be split on whether we need more than this.
Personally
I
can live with the above as this is clearly the fastest way to
move
this draft to
the IESG, but I don't have problems with the fix suggested
by Anders.
How
about we try to reach consensus by Friday afternoon, if we can't
agree
to
agree, then we can always use this clarification.
It would be sooo nice to have HC already to the IESG so we can
concentrate
on getting ND done in Anaheim ;-)
Zach
--
http://www.sensinode.com
http://zachshelby.org - My blog "On the Internet of Things"
http://6lowpan.net - New book - "6LoWPAN: The Wireless Embedded
Internet"
Mobile: +358 40 7796297
Zach Shelby
Head of Research
Sensinode Ltd.
Kidekuja 2
88610 Vuokatti, FINLAND
This e-mail and all attached material are confidential and may
contain
legally
privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient, please
contact
the sender and delete the e-mail from your system without
producing,
distributing or retaining copies thereof.
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
--
http://www.sensinode.com
http://zachshelby.org - My blog "On the Internet of Things"
http://6lowpan.net - New book - "6LoWPAN: The Wireless Embedded
Internet"
Mobile: +358 40 7796297
Zach Shelby
Head of Research
Sensinode Ltd.
Kidekuja 2
88610 Vuokatti, FINLAND
This e-mail and all attached material are confidential and may
contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from
your
system without producing, distributing or retaining copies thereof.
_______________________________________________
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
