Le 21 sept. 2010 à 14:08, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) a écrit :

> Hi Rémi:
> 
> It would not. 
> 
> We'll be very glad that 6LoWPAN compresses RPL optimally. But RPL being layer 
> 2 agnostic cannot depend on 6LoWPAN. 
> Header and IP in IP insertion is problematic on any network,

Couldn't the additional header start with e.g. a 0xF so that it can be 
distinguished from an IPvX header.
(These 4 bits, plus the 20 that would be sufficient if FLs were to be used, 
would make a nice 3 octets.)
It would then be layer-2 agnostic. 

> be it for the MTU issues only.

Why?
Isn't each traversed link authorized to have its link MTU?

Cheers,
RD
> 
> The FL for RPL discussion illustrates that there can be multiple valuable 
> usages of the field by the network. 
> It mostly shows that tying the usage to local balancing only is probably 
> short sighted.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Pascal
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rémi
>> Després
>> Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2010 4:53 PM
>> To: JP Vasseur
>> Cc: IPv6 WG; ROLL WG
>> Subject: Re: [Roll] Flow Label: 12 bits mutable and 8 bits immutable
>> 
>> 
>> Le 18 sept. 2010 à 02:22, JP Vasseur a écrit :
>>> On Sep 15, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> 
>>>> However, it would be pretty easy to put something in 6lowpan to carry those
>> 3 bytes.
>>>> (Consider it an advanced form of header compression for the 48-byte
>>>> IP-in-IP thing, if you don't like the sub-IP thinking.) Consult
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-6lowpan-ext-hdr-00 for a sample base
>> design.
>>>> Such a simple extension may actually be a preferable way to carry ROLL in
>> 6lowpan.
>>> 
>>> "preferable" in which sense ?
>> 
>> At least, IMHO, in that it eliminates the motivation to interfere with the 
>> current
>> discussion on improving flow-label utilization.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> RD
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Roll mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to