Any level of awareness is too much, IMO a RPL implementation should
run unmodified yet benefit from 6LoRH.
For instance, if RPL produces a RH3 with cmpri of 6 and cmpre of 10,
we end up with two RH3-6LoRH, each with its own "size unit", which has
to be power of two -- we end up with a compressed possibly larger than
the original.
Another example is when more than two RH3-6LoRH are included to
benefit from a variety of compression levels: in such case, it is not
even possible to translate the compressed back into a standard RH3.

Generally speaking 6lowpan offers one-to-one mappings between
compressed and original headers, I think it is a pity that 6LoRH
doesn't.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Michael Richardson
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Simon Duquennoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>     > I feel we need to make sure any valid RH3 can be compressed with 6LoRH. 
> This
>     > way, RPL implementations do not need to be aware of 6LoRH.
>
> I'm sensitive to your need, but I'm not sure it's worthwhile.
>
> What kind of awareness do you feel is required?
> There needs to be some communication of what are the interesting prefixes.
> I don't see this as a problem.
>
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

Reply via email to