Re: [6lo] SCHC HC over IEEE 802.15.4: comments

[Carles Gomez Montenegro <[e-mail]>]

Dear Georgios,

Thanks for your response!

Your suggestion has been well noted, and we will definitely take it
into due consideration for -03.

Cheers,

Carles (as one of the authors)


On Thu, 27 Jul 2023 at 18:53, Georgios PAPADOPOULOS
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Dear Carles,
>
> Many thanks for your detailed response.
> I believe we are in line with the vast majority of the points below.
>
> Regarding the Subsection 3.1 point:
>
> - Subsection 3.1:
> [GP] If the idea is to introduce the third stack in Figure 2 (the one in the right), then one could say if you want to cover all options, then another one would be using SCHC compressing only CoAP, while 6LoWPAN for the UDP and IPv6, i.e., CoAP/SCHC HC/UDP/IPv6/6LoWPAN HC/6LoWPAN Frag/802.15.4
>
>
> [CG] Well, the idea was not to actually cover all options. The
> (so-called) "transition" option was added because there was an
> explicit request for it. Is it the case for the option you suggest as
> well?
>
>
> My opinion is yes.
> Since it is the only option/case that is missing out.
> By integrating this, i.e., SCHC compresses CoAP layer, while 6LoWPAN UDP and IPv6, all possible scenarios will be covered.
> Furthermore, the original 6LoWPAN “layer” separation will be guaranteed.
>
> — —
> Thanks,
> Georgios
>
>

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Libre de virus.www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>