Dear TengFei:
I agree that the draft is lacking description when there is no IP in IP. I’ll
create a ticket.
When there is no IP in IP present in the 6LoRH, then the headers compressed by
6LoRH are considered placed right after the IP header compressed by IPHC, and
considered as compressed. It results that the NH bit in the IPHC really
indicates how the compression is done for the header that is after the headers
compressed by 6LoRH.
For an ICMP message I’d think that you’ll be using:
+- ... -+- ... -+-+-+- ... -+-+-+-+-+ ... -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+...
|11110001| RPI | NH = 0 | NH = 58 | ICMP message
|Page 1 | 6LoRH | 6LOWPAN-IPHC | (ICMP) | (no compression)
+- ... -+- ... +-+-+-+- ... -+-+-+-+-+ ... -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+...
<- RFC 6282 ->
No RPL artifact
Does that make sense?
Pascal
From: 6lo [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tengfei Chang
Sent: lundi 18 janvier 2016 09:18
To: [email protected]
Subject: [6lo] Format inside of an RPL domain
Dear All,
Currently I have a question about the format of packet inside of an RPL domain
when using 6LoRH.
For example when ping a mote inside an RPL domain, will the format of echo
request and reply look like this?
PAGE DISPATCH (page 1) + IPHC + 6LoRH RH3 + ICMPv6
PAGE DISPATCH (page 1) + IPHC + 6LoRH RPI + ICMPv6
If so, there is no next header field in 6LoRH to indicate the following field
is ICMP.
What's the right format for this case?
Thanks a lot!
Tengfei
_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
