Re: [lp-wan] augment coupond-ack

Dear Laurent,

Thanks for getting the ball rolling on this one so quickly after the IETF!

On 1) - when you say "ignore the compound-ack from RFC8724" - there is no
compound-ack in RFC8724.
Do you mean this to be - keep the Yang Data Model aligned with RFC8724 and
not include compound-ack in it?

(and thus -> define an extension in the SCHC-Compound-Ack draft ?)

Cheers,
Alex

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 8:51 AM Laurent Toutain <
laurent.toutain@imt-atlantique.fr> wrote:

> Dear lpwaners,
>
> During the last IETF meeting, it was asked to detach the compound-ack from
> the RFC8724 model. I see to ways of doing it.
>
> 1) ignore completely the compound-ack from the RFC8724 data model and
> augment this model such as:
>
> augment
> "/schc:schc/schc:rule/schc:nature/schc:fragmentation/schc:mode/schc:ack-on-error"
> {
> leaf bitmap-format {
> type compound-ack:bitmap-format-type;
> when "derived-from(../schc:fragmentation-mode,
> 'schc:fragmentation-mode-ack-on-error')";
> default "compound-ack:bitmap-RFC8724";
> description
> "How the bitmaps are included in the Ack message.";
> }
> }
>
>
> Where we create the leaf and a specific identityref for compound-ack.
>
> 2) create the leaf in RFC8724 datamodel but just a default value and just
> define the compound ack value in the compound ack model.
>
> Personally, I prefer the first approach, since we cannot guess all the
> time what will be extended, but I would like to have your point of view on
> the subject.
>
> Laurent
> _______________________________________________
> lp-wan mailing list
> lp-wan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan
>