Re: [6lo] 6lo Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7 - Charter-04 proposal
Shahid Raza <periodic@live.com> Tue, 08 October 2013 20:31 UTC
Return-Path: <periodic@live.com>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8AE21F9E33 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.796
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.803]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UMoQjS3z4A0W for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc1-s36.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc1-s36.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0409321F8424 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:30:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU0-SMTP185 ([65.55.116.8]) by blu0-omc1-s36.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:30:46 -0700
X-TMN: [MQhIEujbVXMZRQkOqBT47PASeDWt7DV3]
X-Originating-Email: [periodic@live.com]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP185DD5A828D915FE670A57CAC1C0@phx.gbl>
Received: from [10.0.1.3] ([213.89.59.7]) by BLU0-SMTP185.phx.gbl over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:30:42 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Shahid Raza <periodic@live.com>
In-Reply-To: <0C9447CE-4FCF-428C-A170-94063DB39026@tzi.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 22:30:39 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <mailman.110.1381258860.21585.6lo@ietf.org> <DUB112-W69AEB4E3993B1974B1C9CAC1C0@phx.gbl> <0C9447CE-4FCF-428C-A170-94063DB39026@tzi.org>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Oct 2013 20:30:42.0746 (UTC) FILETIME=[428AD9A0:01CEC465]
Cc: "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6lo] 6lo Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7 - Charter-04 proposal
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discussion of a WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lo>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 20:31:14 -0000
Good!! I misunderstood it then. I read it as "a single header compression scheme that fits to multiple headers, such as GHC". Thanks for the clarification. Regards Shahid On Oct 8, 2013, at 10:19 PM, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote: > Shahid, > > the entirety of RFC 6282 would fall under "applicable to more than one adaptation layer specification" (it is currently being referenced by BT-LE, lowpanz, 6lobac, dect-ule). One example that we had in mind when that phrase was coined was GHC. So why would draft-raza-6lowpan-ipsec-01, which just plugs into the NHC extension point of RFC 6282, like GHC does, not be? > > Grüße, Carsten > >
- Re: [6lo] 6lo Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7 - Charter-04… Shahid Raza
- Re: [6lo] 6lo Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7 - Charter-04… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [6lo] 6lo Digest, Vol 6, Issue 7 - Charter-04… Shahid Raza