Hi Carsten, It's an interesting idea! It would also save flash space by not having special compression for each different header etc.
I'm not sure for ICMPv6/ND if it's ideal though. Compressing the messages with a "special purpose" HC would yield considerably smaller message sizes than generic compression schemes. And I think the compression can be made sufficiently simple to avoid huge code requirements. I'll try to get my own half-baked draft out soon enough that you can get an idea though! -Colin -----Original Message----- From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: July 12, 2010 4:49 PM To: Colin O'Flynn Cc: [email protected]; '6lowpan' Subject: Re: [6lowpan] Size of NS+ARO+SLLAO in nd-10 On Jul 12, 2010, at 12:32, Colin O'Flynn wrote: > Maybe I'll try to whip something up quickly and submit it, just so everyone > can understand the options I was thinking about. Then don't look at this half-baked draft: http://www.tzi.org/~cabo/draft-bormann-6lowpan-ghc-00pre.txt The actual spec in there is a single page (but doesn't define how it is integrated with hc-07 NHC yet; that will be another paragraph and might use up the reserved code). It will probably need another page of "Here's a nice way to use it" for general ICMP, ND, DHCP and RPL, each. I'm not at all sure we want to do this, that's why I never submitted it. (It also helps if you know what RFC3320 is. But that would be way too complicated here.) Gruesse, Carsten _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
