Re: [6lo] SCHC HC over IEEE 802.15.4: 1. Generic vs IEEE 802.15.4-specific document

Hello Pascal,

Thanks for your message.

Sure, let's talk about it at IETF 117!

Cheers,

Carles (as WG participant)

On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 13:21, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>
wrote:

> Hello Carles:
>
> I have an item (against the architecture) about the information that SCHC
> needs in the packets (some of which being implicit could be elided)
>
> My bottom line is that once we have that we should be able to define the
> use cases for which a separate spec is desirable vs on that covers multiple
> L2s.
>
> Same as for IPv6 over foo I guess…
>
> Let’s talk in SF!
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Pascal
>
> Le 13 juil. 2023 à 11:35, Carles Gomez Montenegro <carles.gomez@upc.edu>
> a écrit :
>
> 
> Dear 6lo WG,
>
> We would like to receive feedback about two potential discussion items
> regarding the document on transmission of SCHC-compressed packets over IEEE
> 802.15.4 networks [1]. We will send one separate message for each item.
>
> 1. Generic vs IEEE 802.15.4-specific document
>
> One question that has been raised on occasion is whether the document
> should be written specifically to enable the use of SCHC header compression
> over IEEE 802.15.4 networks (i.e., the current approach) or in a generic
> way, independent of a specific underlying technology.
>
> We (authors) followed the current IEEE 802.15.4-specific approach as it
> seemed more straightforward, and focusing on IEEE 802.15.4 entailed
> interesting opportunities. Coincidentally, this approach is similar to the
> original 6LoWPAN approach, which was designed to enable IPv6 over, mostly,
> IEEE 802.15.4. 6LoWPAN has been reused/adapted in 6lo to enable IPv6 over
> several other technologies, by means of a technology-specific document for
> each technology. Perhaps a similar approach could be followed if there is
> interest to enable the use of SCHC header compression over other
> technologies.
>
> Notes:
>
> - If we write a generic document, there will still need to be a
> technology-specific document for each intended underlying technology.
>
> - The document uses only the SCHC header compression component (i.e.,
> 6LoWPAN/6lo functionality is used for fragmentation).
>
> Thoughts? Would you have any particular preference on this matter?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carles and Ana (document authors)
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6lo-schc-15dot4/
> _______________________________________________
> 6lo mailing list
> 6lo@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
>
>