[6lowpan] #36: Address Option: S=2 never makes sense.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[6lowpan] #36: Address Option: S=2 never makes sense.
#36: Address Option: S=2 never makes sense.
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Reporter: cabo at tzi.org | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone:
Component: nd | Version:
Severity: Active WG Document | Keywords:
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
S=3 uses the same number of bits (after padding).
S=2 cannot be relayed and has to be replaced with S=3 at the relay.
So why ever bother with sending S=2?
(S=2 also generates an ugly cross-layer dependency on the L2 sender
address -- I think ND is otherwise free of these.)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/trac/ticket/36>
6lowpan <http://tools.ietf.org/6lowpan/>
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.