Thanks pascal for explaining! Yes, I vote to impose an order for the headers in the packet. It helps to understand the format of packet generally. Thanks a lot!
Tengfei On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) < [email protected]> wrote: > This is correct Tengfei, and quite classical. > > > > Headers are like a stack placed in front of the packet. One builds an > LOWPAN-IPHC – compressed packet that does not have any RPL artifact in it. > Then the RPL artifacts are added as 6LoRH headers. We have not imposed an > order yet but it makes sense to place the RPI first if any, then the RH3 if > any, then the 6LoRH. > > > > Would you wish that we impose an order to simplify the parsing? > > > > Pascal > > > > *From:* 6tisch [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Tengfei > Chang > *Sent:* mercredi 20 janvier 2016 09:20 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [6tisch] The "BEFORE" and "AFTER" > > > > Dear all, > > > > As recently more discussion in the ML about the format of packet, > sometimes we say some header after/before the IPv6 header. I would like to > clarify this. > > > > 1. For me, I say with the way that mac header is the first header in the > packet and then, several Routing Headers are AFTER mac header (no mesh > header/fragmenet header in between). IPHC header is AFTER those Routing > Headers. > > > > 2. However, with the view of constructing a packet, IPHC is first added > into packet, then RHs are placed AFTER IPHC, MAC header is constructed at > the end. (I feel pascal is using this way to describe the order of header, > right?) > > > > What's the way when we describe something like this? > > > > Thanks > > Tengfei > > > > >
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
