Hi Erik,
On Jun 11, 2010, at 2:36 AM, Erik Nordmark wrote:
On 06/10/10 12:31 PM, Jonathan Hui wrote:
So a packet sent by R1 that will be forwarded outside of the ROLL
network will have a outer IPv6 header whose destination is the BR?
That is where we started. Draft-01 does have a line or
On 06/10/10 12:31 PM, Jonathan Hui wrote:
So a packet sent by R1 that will be forwarded outside of the ROLL
network will have a outer IPv6 header whose destination is the BR?
That is where we started. Draft-01 does have a line or two about the
possibility of exempting the last entry in a RH4
On Jun 10, 2010, at 04:13, Jonathan Hui wrote:
If you don't think the mechanism in 6lowpan-hc is effective in compressing
IP-in-IP datagrams, then we should discuss that on the 6lowpan ML.
Indeed, let's do that, best with actual examples.
Gruesse, Carsten
attacks
Comments/feedback appreciated as always.
--
Jonathan Hui
Begin forwarded message:
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool idsubmiss...@ietf.org
Date: June 9, 2010 8:48:30 AM PDT
To: j...@archrock.com
Cc: j...@cisco.com,cul...@cs.berkeley.edu
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-hui-6man
Hi Carsten/ Jonathan,
One thing I can see is that in RPL cases we will have the inner and
outer header destination IPv6 address the same (for packets from
outside the domain). We can easily compress that. In some cases the
inner and outer IPv6 source address may be the same (For packets
On 06/ 9/10 09:32 AM, Jonathan Hui wrote:
We have updated both draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header as well as
draft-hui-6man-rpl-option-header based on feedback from Anaheim as well
as discussions on the ML.
Summary of changes:
- Specify a maximum size for header/option so that it is possible to
Hi Erik,
When IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling is used, what is the destination IP address in
the outer header? Normally it would be the router that would strip the outer
header and RH4. Is that the case here as well?
It wasn't clear to me whether you are proposing IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling for
packets
On Jun 10, 2010, at 12:21 PM, Erik Nordmark wrote:
On 06/10/10 12:06 PM, Jonathan Hui wrote:
On Jun 10, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Erik Nordmark wrote:
When IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling is used, what is the destination IP
address in the outer header? Normally it would be the router that
would strip the
On 06/10/10 12:06 PM, Jonathan Hui wrote:
On Jun 10, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Erik Nordmark wrote:
When IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling is used, what is the destination IP
address in the outer header? Normally it would be the router that
would strip the outer header and RH4. Is that the case here as well?
On Jun 10, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Erik Nordmark wrote:
When IPv6-in-IPv6 tunneling is used, what is the destination IP
address in the outer header? Normally it would be the router that
would strip the outer header and RH4. Is that the case here as well?
Yes, that is what we intended.
It
Submission Tool idsubmiss...@ietf.org
Date: June 9, 2010 8:48:30 AM PDT
To: j...@archrock.com
Cc: j...@cisco.com,cul...@cs.berkeley.edu
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-
header-01
A new version of I-D, draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header-01.txt has
been
...@cs.berkeley.edu
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header-01
A new version of I-D, draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header-01.txt has been
successfully submitted by Jonathan Hui and posted to the IETF repository.
Filename: draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header
...@cs.berkeley.edu
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header-01
A new version of I-D, draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header-01.txt has
been
successfully submitted by Jonathan Hui and posted to the IETF
repository.
Filename:draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header
Revision
On Jun 9, 2010, at 19:37, Jonathan Hui wrote:
The case where IP-in-IP tunneling is not needed is if the RPL router itself
originates a packet. In a LLN network, it is common for RPL routers to
originate datagrams as they often serve as application end-points as well.
Jonathan,
do we know
Carsten,
On Jun 9, 2010, at 2:51 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
do we know how to compress this IP-RH4-IP-UDP stack?
(The first IP header compresses reasonable well; I'm worrying about
the second.)
Or did RPL just become a lot less useful in a LoWPAN with hosts?
Section 4.2 of the
15 matches
Mail list logo
