Raj, I think the BT-LE adaptation layer is different than the lowpan
adaptation layer[*].
The points I am trying to make are:
- IPv6 works ok over that BT-LE adaptation protocol spec, without
modifications to lowpan (since it is not used by BT-LE).
- lowpan adaptation layer may indeed need to be modified to support
BT-LE Codes. This would be helpful in networks running lowpan and
not BT-LE adaptation protocol. This would not be IPv6 work, though,
but lowpan work.
- the quantity of work seems significant, difficult to achieve in a WG
which does not meet.
- this seems to be adaptation layer work, and this would contradict
statements that we don't do adaptation layer work at IETF.
Raj - is this clearer from my side?
Alex
[*]
BT-LE adaptation layer ("adaptation protocol spec" page 1382 of
https://www.bluetooth.org/docman/handler/downloaddoc.ashx?doc_id=229737)
is not the same as
lowpan adaptation layer (section 5 of RFC4944).
Because, for example, the message format of BT-LE on page 1404 of that
BT-LE spec seems to start with a Length field, whereas the frame format
on page 6 of RFC4944 starts with something different (dispatch type,
mesh type, etc.)
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
