Thanks Pascal for opening the issues, and I agree we stick to the
current draft for the plugtest.
/Simon


On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear all:
>
>
>
> I uploaded the changes made after the discussions on the 6lo ML and
> conformed at the interim Friday.
>
> There are 2 discussions left open, for a better compression of the RH when
> the boundary is not a power of 2 (Simon) and whether we should refrain from
> consuming the addresses of the RH as we go (Simon and Anand). For both,
> there is an active ticket at 6lo:
>
>
>
> #14: More optimal compression of 6LoRH
>
> #11: RH3 6LoRH not recoverable
>
>
>
> For the plugtest, though, I suggest we live with what we have,
> draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch-04.txt and
> draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch-01.txt.
>
>
>
> Note: With this spec an example of  Downward Packet In Non-Storing Mode will
> be:
>
>
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+- ... +-+-+- ... -+-+-- ... -+-+- ... -+-+-+-+-+ ... +-...
>
> |11110001 |RH3-6LoRH | RPI-6LoRH | IP-in-IP | NH=1 |11110CPP| UDP | UDP
>
> |Page 1   |Type1 S=2 |           |  6LoRH   | IPHC | UDP    | hdr |load
>
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+- ... +-+-+- ... -+-+-- ... -+-+- ... -+-+-+-+-+ ... +-...
>
>             <-8bytes->                         <-  RFC 6282      ->
>
>                                                 No RPL artifact
>
>
>
>               Figure 20: Example Compressed Packet with RH3.
>
>
>
> Are we OK?
>
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>
> Sent: samedi 23 janvier 2016 13:07
>
> To: Robert Cragie <[email protected]>; Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
> <[email protected]>; Dr. Carsten Bormann <[email protected]>; Laurent Toutain
> <[email protected]>; Carsten Bormann <[email protected]>;
> Laurent Toutain <[email protected]>
>
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch-04.txt
>
>
>
>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch-04.txt
>
> has been successfully submitted by Pascal Thubert and posted to the IETF
> repository.
>
>
>
> Name:                  draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch
>
> Revision:              04
>
> Title:                     6LoWPAN Routing Header
>
> Document date: 2016-01-23
>
> Group:                  6lo
>
> Pages:                  31
>
> URL:
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch-04.txt
>
> Status:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch/
>
> Htmlized:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch-04
>
> Diff:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch-04
>
>
>
> Abstract:
>
>    This specification introduces a new 6LoWPAN dispatch type for use in
>
>    6LoWPAN Route-Over topologies, that initially covers the needs of RPL
>
>    (RFC6550) data packets compression.  Using this dispatch type, this
>
>    specification defines a method to compress RPL Option (RFC6553)
>
>    information and Routing Header type 3 (RFC6554), an efficient IP-in-
>
>    IP technique and is extensible for more applications.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
>
>
> The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 6tisch mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
>

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

Reply via email to