I think it was a mistake being 0x3f in the first place. It was 0xff in an earlier draft but changed and I never noticed it to fix it. -- Jonathan On Apr 8, 2015, at 6:30 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, Pat. > > 6TiSCH would like to be able to expose a Rank in the full byte. We’d really > appreciate that you add that comment to the ballot. > > Thanks for all ! > > Pascal > > From: Pat Kinney [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: mercredi 8 avril 2015 15:26 > To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: join priority in 802.15.4 > > We did talk about the join priority contained within the TSCH Synchronization > IE. The language of the text was changed to be clear and concise, however > leaving the intent the same, with this note: "A lower value of join priority > indicates that connection to the beaconing device is a shorter route distance > to the PAN coordinator". Also, indeed the current value of Join Priority is > limited to 0x3f. > > I can insert a comment in the upcoming Sponsor Ballot modifying the > definition to also allow DagRank along with modifying the range to be 0 to > 0xff. Is this what 6tisch wants? > > > Pat > > Pat Kinney > Kinney Consulting LLC > IEEE 802.15 WG vice chair, TG chair > ISA100.11a WG chair > O: +1.847.960.3715 > [email protected] > > On 8, Apr2015, at 2:14, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Pat: > > I have an open issue on the 6TiSCH architecture about the text below: > > A root is configured or obtains by some external means the > knowledge of the RPLInstanceID > for the TSGI. The root advertises its DagRank in the TSGI, that > MUST be less than 0xFF, > as its Join Priority (JP) in its IEEE802.15.4e Extended Beacons > (EB). We'll note that the > JP is now specified between 0 and 0x3F leaving 2 bits in the > octet unused in the IEEE802.15.4e > specification. After consultation with IEEE authors, it was > asserted that 6TiSCH can make > a full use of the octet to carry an integer value up to 0xFF. > > I remember that you proposed changes to the join priority format. What will > the final 802.15.4 2015 say about this? > > Many thanks in advance! > > Pascal > > _______________________________________________ > 6tisch mailing list > [email protected] > http://cp.mcafee.com/d/5fHCNAg6wUSyMCYMqejhOYUedTdEK3CkPqbwVBYSyUed7aar9EVdKfffecnKr4qilH057Ox-NVsSva7X7BPuCzB1dZdZ_HYOOyyMCqeuLsKDt5fDPhO-yqerKsJt6OaaJTA-l3PWApmU6CQjq9K_8I9LfzAm4PhOrKr9PCJhbcatbVKY01MjlS67OFek7qUVelb4PrAVkIjbAaJMJZ0lbVKY01dEzAQNNI5-Aq83iSVelb4PiWq816IE6y1qcGNBcIq89gd43RQ-hvVwSOYr9MZghcze
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
