I can do that.
--
Jonathan Hui
On Mar 12, 2010, at 7:41 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote:
Colin,
Good point. Is there anyone that wants to put together a short
presentation on the issue with the current spec in 4944 and the
proposed
alternative(s).
geoff
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 08:55 +0000, Colin O'Flynn wrote:
Hi Geoff,
There was also the issue of using PAN-ID's with 16-bit compressed
addresses.
I think we almost reached a consensus on the mailing list there
too, but I
don't think there was a final statement of what to do.
-Colin
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf
Of Geoff Mulligan
Sent: March 12, 2010 7:54 AM
To: 6lowpan
Subject: [6lowpan] agenda items
so far the only person that has replied to be was Erik to talk
about the
nd-simple draft.
Do we think that we have reached consensus on the HC draft. Should
we
move forward with the plan to just explicitly state that
compression can
only be used in first fragment? If we think that we have consensus
on
the issue we do not need to talk about it at the meeting.
Are there other topics for this meeting other than ND?
Draft agendas were due two days ago...
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
