Open cgundogan opened 6 years ago
I'm wondering if we should preserve ndn2013 or integrate 0.3 and update the parts in code where necessary (so ndn2013 evolves to something like ndn2018)? Any thoughts @blacksheeep
I would update the packet format, I would argue there is no advantage of maintaining a stale version of a packet format.
Apparently, there is basically no implementation which supports it (yet). I can't estimate yet how much it differs from 0.2 and 0.3 is still subject to change. On the other hand I also only have vague understanding of the number of features of 0.2.1 ccn-lite supports.
We probably should also be aware that this is very likely to break the python scripts in src/py
.
there is basically no implementation which supports it
There is implementation of NDN v0.3 now.
I have a C language decoder in https://github.com/usnistgov/ndn-dpdk csrc/ndni
folder.
NDN provides documentation for an updated packet format, the spec can be found here [1]. The new packet format looks promising. We should support that in the near future.
[1] https://named-data.net/doc/NDN-packet-spec/current/