Re: more IP compression work to do?
Rodney Thayer <rodney@sabletech.com> Thu, 15 October 1998 11:26 UTC
Return-Path: rodney@sabletech.com
Received: from kickme.cisco.com (kickme.cisco.com [198.92.30.42]) by ftp-eng.cisco.com (8.8.5-Cisco.1/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA11845 for <ippcp-archive-file@ftp-eng.cisco.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:26:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bubbuh.cisco.com (bubbuh.cisco.com [198.92.30.35]) by kickme.cisco.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA09377 for <extdom.ippcp@filter.cisco.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:27:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-mailhub-3.cisco.com (sj-mailhub-3.cisco.com [171.68.224.215]) by bubbuh.cisco.com (8.8.4-Cisco.1/CISCO.GATE.1.1) with ESMTP id EAA12504 for <ippcp@external.cisco.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:25:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from proxy1.cisco.com (proxy1.cisco.com [192.31.7.88]) by sj-mailhub-3.cisco.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA00832 for <ippcp@external.cisco.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:38:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from smap@localhost) by proxy1.cisco.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id EAA07190 for <ippcp@external.cisco.com>; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 04:25:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kansas.pn.com(204.96.36.40) by proxy1.cisco.com via smap (V2.0) id xma007181; Thu, 15 Oct 98 11:25:30 GMT
X-SMAP-Received-From: outside
Received: from rodney (dt183n25.tampabay.rr.com [24.92.211.37]) by kansas.pn.com (8.9.1/8.8.0) with SMTP id HAA22943; Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:15:33 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199810151115.HAA22943@kansas.pn.com>
X-Sender: rodney@pop.pn.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.2
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1998 07:03:13 -0400
To: Stephen Waters <Stephen.Waters@digital.com>
From: Rodney Thayer <rodney@sabletech.com>
Subject: Re: more IP compression work to do?
Cc: ippcp@external.cisco.com
In-Reply-To: <250F9C8DEB9ED011A14D08002BE4F64C01EB59C0@wade.reo.dec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Did you check the email archives? This was discussed, I believe. At 10:48 AM 10/15/98 +0100, you wrote: > > Hi, > > Are there any plans to extend IPPCP to allow IP header compression >(lots of work on this in PPPext land)? > I guess this would be limited to the case where a negotiation >protocol was present - e.g. IKE, where the extent of the > compression could be negotiated for an IPSEC tunnel, say. > > Regards, Steve. >
- more IP compression work to do? Stephen Waters
- Re: more IP compression work to do? Rodney Thayer
- Re: more IP compression work to do? Avram Shacham