Esko Dijk <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Sounds like we should consider this direction. What about "me.arpa" ?

sa.me.arpa ;_0

    > Additional benefits in cBRSKI context are:
    > 1. For sender of Link Format: not having to encode the IPv6 LL address in
    > UTF-8 format.
    > 2. For receiver: not having to, or accidentally trying to, parse the IPv6 
LL
    > address from UTF-8 format.
    > 3. Avoid duplicate information in two different encodings which might 
lead to
    > unexpected bugs (e.g. due to implementations using the different version 
of
    > the information).

Agreed.

Would like to hear from some CoAP gurus now.

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide




Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to