Re: [6tisch] The "BEFORE" and "AFTER"

[Tengfei Chang <[e-mail]>]

Thanks pascal for explaining!

Yes, I vote to impose an order for the headers in the packet. It helps to
understand the format of packet generally. Thanks a lot!

Tengfei

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> This is correct Tengfei, and quite classical.
>
>
>
> Headers are like a stack placed in front of the packet. One builds an
> LOWPAN-IPHC – compressed packet that does not have any RPL artifact in it.
> Then the RPL artifacts are added as 6LoRH headers. We have not imposed an
> order yet but it makes sense to place the RPI first if any, then the RH3 if
> any, then the 6LoRH.
>
>
>
> Would you wish that we impose an order to simplify the parsing?
>
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
>
> *From:* 6tisch [mailto:[e-mail]] *On Behalf Of *Tengfei
> Chang
> *Sent:* mercredi 20 janvier 2016 09:20
> *To:* [e-mail]
> *Subject:* [6tisch] The "BEFORE" and "AFTER"
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
>
> As recently more discussion in the ML about the format of packet,
> sometimes we say some header after/before the IPv6 header. I would like to
> clarify this.
>
>
>
> 1. For me, I say with the way that mac header is the first header in the
> packet and then, several Routing Headers are AFTER mac header (no mesh
> header/fragmenet header in between).  IPHC header is AFTER those Routing
> Headers.
>
>
>
> 2. However, with the view of constructing a packet, IPHC is first added
> into packet, then RHs are placed AFTER IPHC, MAC header is constructed at
> the end. (I feel pascal is using this way to describe the order of header,
> right?)
>
>
>
> What's the way when we describe something like this?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Tengfei
>
>
>
>
>