Project

General

Profile

Task #4780

Make Interest Parameters TLV non-critical

Added by Davide Pesavento 10 months ago. Updated 7 months ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Normal
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Estimated time:

Description

As discussed on 2018-11-26, the Interest Parameters element should be redefined to use a non-critical TLV-TYPE.


Related issues

Related to NDN Specifications - Feature #4831: Redefine ParametersSha256DigestComponent covered areaClosed

History

#1 Updated by Davide Pesavento 8 months ago

  • Status changed from New to In Progress
  • Assignee set to Davide Pesavento
  • % Done changed from 0 to 30

#2 Updated by Junxiao Shi 8 months ago

As discussed on 20190130 NFD call, a range of TLV-TYPE numbers indicates of the start of digest computation area for ParametersSha256DigestComponent.
I'd suggest renumbering Parameters to 0x30 instead of 0x24, so that bitwise expression (tlvType & 0xF0) == 0x30 identifies this range.

#3 Updated by Davide Pesavento 8 months ago

Junxiao Shi wrote:

I'd suggest renumbering Parameters to 0x30 instead of 0x24, so that bitwise expression (tlvType & 0xF0) == 0x30 identifies this range.

err... why? [48-63] or [36-51], what's the difference? both intervals are currently unassigned.

#4 Updated by Junxiao Shi 8 months ago

Bitwise operator is better than inequal comparison operator, at least in hardware implementation (think electric circuits where it needs less gates).
Although the need for hardware implementation at this level may be sparse, there’s no harm in assigning a hardware-friendly number.

#5 Updated by Junxiao Shi 7 months ago

  • Related to Feature #4831: Redefine ParametersSha256DigestComponent covered area added

#6 Updated by Davide Pesavento 7 months ago

Shouldn't ParametersSha256DigestComponent also be non-critical? What's the point of having one critical but not the other?

#7 Updated by Junxiao Shi 7 months ago

Shouldn't ParametersSha256DigestComponent also be non-critical? What's the point of having one critical but not the other?

Evolvability rules do not apply to name component types.

#8 Updated by Davide Pesavento 7 months ago

And where is that written?

#9 Updated by Davide Pesavento 7 months ago

  • % Done changed from 30 to 80

ndn-cxx implementation update https://gerrit.named-data.net/c/ndn-cxx/+/5217

#10 Updated by Davide Pesavento 7 months ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Code review
  • % Done changed from 80 to 100

#11 Updated by Davide Pesavento 7 months ago

  • Status changed from Code review to Closed

Also available in: Atom PDF