I support Kris point. RFC 2464 for example indicates how to construct the link local address from the MAC layer field
The IPv6 link-local address [AARCH <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2464#ref-AARCH>] for an Ethernet interface is formed by appending the Interface Identifier, as defined above, to the prefix FE80::/64. In minimal, for example, we say what information to be used in the JP field of the Synchronization IE or what specific IEs from all the possible set have to be sent in the EB to advertise the network and what are their specific values. Both documents in my opinion build a link between the above and below layers by defining a set of rules or conventions. kind regards, Xavi 2015-11-30 19:10 GMT+01:00 Brian Haberman <[email protected]>: > Hi Kris, > > On 11/30/15 1:00 PM, Kris Pister wrote: > > That was the original goal. > > > > Hmm... Then there may be more things missing from this document then. > IPv6 address generation rules/guidance, NDP operation, SLAAC > functionality, MTU behavior, etc. all come to mind for that kind of > document. Granted, those may be covered via reference to other RFCs... > > The main point is that if that is the goal, it is not clear when the > Abstract starts with "This document describes the minimal set of rules > to operate an IEEE 802.15.4 Timeslotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) network." > > Brian > > > ksjp > > > > On 11/30/2015 9:57 AM, Brian Haberman wrote: > >> Is this document supposed > >> to be the 802.15.4e equivalent of RFC 2464? > > > _______________________________________________ > 6tisch mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch > >
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
