Re: [lp-wan] Fwd: draft-architecture-02-inputs TERMINOLOGY

Hello Ana, SCHCers.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention,

I think we should keep things as simple as we can because introducing more terms would just make it more difficult.

What if we consider a context to be a "set of instantiated rules"?. Therefore, this context consists of a set of rules plus the necessary metadata (timers, ... ) to identify the other end and stablish the SCHC instance (session).  If the instance is not used, we only have context as the Set of Rules (i.e no metadata just the information required to make the C/D and F/R)

The Set of Rules gives the information required to make the C/D and F/R

Since this meta data might vary during the same session (for example, TCP Flow or modifying rules using CORECONF, which are new cases where SCHC can be applied, ...), this new understanding of context is different from that in 8724.

Then we just have two terms: Context and Set of Rules and we forget about "Rule set", "Rule Database"

Ivan.

---

Hello Pascal,

I've divided my mail into different threads to discuss each point individually.

I've copied the initial discussion.
---

The big question for terminology is whether RFC 8724 is the reference. We'll need to talk about that. For the newcomer, the architecture should be the reference, even if that means impacting RFC 8724.

[Ana] We need to make this draft the reference and agree if the terminology of RFC8724 is used, which could be a good thing for those that have already read it and implemented it. For the newcomers, at least until we find a consensus, they must read RFC8724, and follow this discussion. Of course, I'm for finding a consensus and using it. Let's try to agree and find good terminology.

-set of rules or set of Compression/Decompression (C/D) rules.

> Is it the context or something else?

Yes. My problem is that the real "context," understood as an operational environment, should represent all the data associated with a particular instance, and each instance should have its own.

RFC 8724 uses "context" for a rule set, which is instantiated for each instance and does not represent the whole context of that instance.

-rule database. I didn't find any definition for it. Does it mean a context plus something else? or only context?

The text says

"

... select from the rule database the set of rules that apply to the SCHC Device and the current state of their exchange, e.g., timers and previous fragments.

"

For the lack of a better term, we used a database. Happy to fix it. That's the operational environment I was talking about, and the set of instantiated rules is just a component of that. The state includes timers and whatever else this instance is manipulating.

-Rule set. Do you mean context?

Does context mean instantiated or not? Like the rules could have $IP for the source IP, and then once instantiated for a device, it becomes 2001:dba::1

[Ana] Do we need to introduce the instance parameter in the definition of context?

You use it, so we must differentiate each instance from the whole.

Introducing the instantiating parameter makes us three terms.

- Context. In an operational environment should represent all the data associated with a particular instance, and each instance should have its own.

- Set of Rules. Is the context instantiated for each instance

- Rule set. Is the instance used in a device

For instance, if the instance is not used, we only have context as the information required to make the C/D and F/R.

How are things most precise? With or without this instance parameter?

In my opinion it is easier to only have context.

Ana

_______________________________________________
lp-wan mailing list
lp-wan@ietf.org<mailto:lp-wan@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan

--
Gracias
Ivan Marino