Re: [lp-wan] Options to progress SCHC/Sigfox and new Compound ACK concept

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

Hi everyone,

+1 (for Option 2) as well.

The Compound ACK extends the functionality defined in RFC 8724, and it may
be beneficial for several technologies. Therefore, it would be cleaner to
specify it in a generic, technology-independent way.

Cheers,

Carles




> +1 for Option 2.
> This is the cleanest way in the long run.
> Best regards,
>
> Dominique
>
>
> From: lp-wan [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Diego S.
> Wistuba La Torre
> Sent: vendredi 18 juin 2021 19:17
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [lp-wan] Options to progress SCHC/Sigfox and new Compound ACK
> concept
>
>
> Hi all. I also favor option 2 as it allows the SCHC Compound ACK to be
> defined generally with no constraints to any SCHC Profile (and cleaner
> referencing to the document that defines it too). Then it should be
> extended and adapted to Profiles that want to implement it using their own
> parameters and algorithms.
>
> Best,
>
> Diego S. Wistuba La Torre
> El 15-06-2021 a las 11:09, Juan Carlos Zuniga escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> As discussed over the LPWAN interim meeting, we have a few options to
> progress the documents:
>
>
>   1.  Include in the SCHC/Sigfox draft [1] a Yang Data Model extension of
> [2] to define the new SCHC Compound ACK as a Fragmentation parameter
>   2.  Split the SCHC/Sigfox draft [1] in the following way:
>
>      *   Write a new draft to define the SCHC Compound ACK and the
> associated extensions to the Data Model
>      *   Standalone SCHC/Sigfox profile
>
>   1.  Extend the existing Yang Data Model draft [2] to include the SCHC
> Compound ACK as a Fragmentation parameter
>
> [1]
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-06
> [2]
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-yang-data-model-04
>
> Please reply if you have any views.
>
> Best,
>
> Juan Carlos