Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[email protected]> wrote: > Could we leverage the use of RPL information draft to indicate that the > RPL info can be safely removed on RPL packets outgoing the domain ? I > think that would pass.
I don't think that would work... but feel free to suggest that during the
WGLC for the document :-)
I suggest that we should get the rules as they are past IESG, and then if we
want to do better that we can do that.
> We can also indicate that insertion in allowed on incoming packets and
> see what pushback we get now.
> This would avoid having too many flag days as the rules become more
> realistic. The times they are a-changing..,
Aside from 0x63->0x23, there are no other flag days that I forsee.
If one decides to insert/remove headers at the DODAG root, then I think
that this is a unilateral decision. If one has a network that is intolerant
of the 0x63 RPI option, and updating the LLN is not feasible, then either
fixing that in the DODAG root or removing the header at the DODAG seems like
something a product might just do.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
