Subject: [6lowpan] #36: Address Option: S=2 never makes sense.

From: "6lowpan issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 05:46:09 -0000

#36: Address Option: S=2 never makes sense.
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]        |       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/>