Hi JP and Jonathan,
I support this draft for RPL usage.
One comment: it might be useful to restrict "cmpr" to a 'multiple of
8' in order to have better byte alignment easy handling of the code.
Is there any case, where the elided prefix may not be in multiple of 8
in RPL ?
Thanks,
-Samita
On
Hi Jonathan,
I just re-read the draft I had written about 3 years ago and tried to
figure out things we could further add to your draft.
Do you have any diameter in the RPL network? If so there are 2 questions:
1. Is 255 a good enough value? With your draft we can allow only a
maximum of 255 int
>-Original Message-
>From: Jonathan Hui [mailto:j...@archrock.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 12:38 AM
>To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
>Cc: Philip Levis; JP Vasseur; ipv6@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: New Version Notification for
draft-hui-6man-rpl-option-00.txt
>Hemant,
Vishwas,
FYI, we currently have two initial 6man drafts that describe
mechanisms for supporting RPL. The concrete concerns about the
routing header seem to apply to the rpl-routing-header draft rather
than the rpl-option draft.
To answer your question, we did intend to address the well-
gt;> From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Philip Levis
>> Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:08 PM
>> To: JP Vasseur
>> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: New Version Notification for
>> draft-hui-6man-rpl-option-00.txt
>>
>>
nsiderations-
03
Hemant
-Original Message-
From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of
Philip Levis
Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2010 1:08 PM
To: JP Vasseur
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for
draft-hui-6man-rpl-option-00.txt
On May 17, 201
Notification for
draft-hui-6man-rpl-option-00.txt
On May 17, 2010, at 6:18 AM, JP Vasseur wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> This is to re-activate our discussion during the last IETF
> meetings. Feed-back are very welcome since we would like to move
> forward as soon as possible, this propos
On May 17, 2010, at 6:18 AM, JP Vasseur wrote:
Dear all,
This is to re-activate our discussion during the last IETF
meetings. Feed-back are very welcome since we would like to move
forward as soon as possible, this proposed extension is indeed
critical for RPL to move forward.
Many Tha
