Robert Moskowitz writes:
> Yet in 8724, they define a in-band header:
>
> |--- Compressed Header ---|
>
> +-++
>
> | RuleID | Compression Residue | Payload |
>
> +--
The question we are asking ourselves is should we re-write the spec with
SCHC.
Yours,
Daniel
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 9:58 AM Tero Kivinen wrote:
> Robert Moskowitz writes:
> > Yet in 8724, they define a in-band header:
> >
> >|--- Compressed Header ---|
> >
> >+-
No question IMHO. It would fit into other SCHC rules in use.
I will look at the draft; it has been a while. I have a real use case,
but I will see what, other than 8750 gains are available for this use case.
On 4/21/22 10:36, Daniel Migault wrote:
The question we are asking ourselves is shou
The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7296,
"Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)".
--
You may review the report below and at:
https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid6940
--
Type: Editorial
Reported
Greetings,
We are unable to verify this erratum that the submitter marked as editorial.
Please note that we have changed the “Type” of the following errata
report to “Technical”. As Stream Approver, please review and set the
Status and Type accordingly (see the definitions at
https://www.rf
