Re: [lp-wan] re-order header field request

["weigengyu" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

> Note that not all IPv6 packets will require fragmentation,
> and then losses may happen,
> also non-fragmented packets may be interleaved with fragments, etc.

It seems that there may not apply two rules for one IP packets.
Or all fragments belonged to one pakcet should have the same Rule ID and the 
Dtag.

If one fragment is lost, the packet can not be assembled.
The packet will be assembled only after all fragments received correctly.

Fragments belonged to different packets will be assigned with different 
Dtags.

Anything wrong?

Regards,

Gengyu WEI
Network Technology Center
School of Computer
Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
-----原始邮件----- 
From: Carles Gomez Montenegro
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:13 PM
To: weigengyu
Cc: lp-wan ; Arun ; Ana Minaburo ; Laurent Toutain
Subject: Re: [lp-wan] re-order header field request


Hi Gengyu,

> Why each successive fragment must contain a Rule ID?
> It is known that the DTag is used as an indication of fragments belonged
> to
> the same IPv6 packet.
> A Rule ID in the first fragement can be passed to the receiver how to do
> HC
> compression,
> but the successive fragments containing a Rule ID just send a redundent
> information to the receiver.
> Right?

The Rule ID is needed to provide a receiver with information on what type
of content is being carried (and how it has to be handled). Note that not
all IPv6 packets will require fragmentation, and then losses may happen,
also non-fragmented packets may be interleaved with fragments, etc.

Cheers,

Carles


> Regards,
>
> Gengyu WEI
> Network Technology Center
> School of Computer
> Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications

_______________________________________________
lp-wan mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan