Re: [IPsec] [Dtls-iot] IPsec/Diet-ESP for IoT and Minimal ESP

"Valery Smyslov" <svanru@gmail.com> Fri, 28 February 2014 06:34 UTC

Return-Path: <svanru@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA3441A0411; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:34:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.561
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.439] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gONPLLNXFnNV; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:34:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-la0-x22e.google.com (mail-la0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F80C1A03FF; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:34:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-la0-f46.google.com with SMTP id hr17so2414764lab.33 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:34:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:from:to:cc:references:subject:date:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zsfQQTerMM5cbUzpn7XQtyKF//54MRAVFyCJCxx/vq0=; b=hXE2iHAMLJgSnD1VF6/LzSZyTzw4gk6l5SaKs5p7jdmMNcnNdubRE4VKRAGB23kkZY 2l7v8Kp1kKtA6WEvp0UdxJxzEvgKGzn+LzGRY5ewpRErj+JoMIGtn7DG971arouSrxjp mWDaYLNCwsOnv5r8LWcHT07Ek4gH1W8hvIRmoJbKwMZ9AcQmwSsUdrIr1iSZvbcG7rQj w+BS4E8E1Lgn3WnTI1hldaCJdY7li7aN/A8UyMImp2j6IOCXse9Zrwho1wTUeVINa5a6 WrnvwshjWkC8JWp0/Aq3Uc2gKFV4jY5MzuaLf9ya9dO8w6VYIOQqUp1umNKxmNYmzswA PcPw==
X-Received: by 10.112.180.72 with SMTP id dm8mr9499562lbc.28.1393569271898; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:34:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from buildpc ([93.188.44.200]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id rt7sm2585078lbb.0.2014.02.27.22.34.30 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Feb 2014 22:34:31 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <AE7FAD7209504483B5444AF43BD9BF23@buildpc>
From: "Valery Smyslov" <svanru@gmail.com>
To: "Daniel Migault" <mglt.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <CADZyTk=k3=-BN=8ma=beMh9b0skswW-SvmbP9Ae2AOQwbV0k-Q@mail.gmail.com><530393EA.5020008@gmail.com><F1954BB774EA4C7DAA729D2623D8F364@buildpc> <CADZyTk=TQxr3eToEqbUKr3e3pa4iMKz2hd9ZA=s-bXfb_tnPzg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 10:34:29 +0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/HDFpO45S4QJDBkIuN3TIHimMsTE
Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>, Sye Loong Keoh <SyeLoong.Keoh@glasgow.ac.uk>, lwip@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IPsec] [Dtls-iot] IPsec/Diet-ESP for IoT and Minimal ESP
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 06:34:35 -0000

Hi Daniel,

> However, the ratio computing vs communication in IoT is quite
> impressive and there is a high interest in compressing frames before
> transmitting them.
>    - Computing ranges from 0.5nJ per instruction for extremely
> energy-efficient microcontrollers (such as CoolRisc or MSP430) to 200
> nJ per instruction for high-performance microprocessors (such as
> ARM9).
>    - Communication: from 100nJ to 1uJ per bit transmitted or
> received, depending on modulation complexity and transmission power
> (we only consider "low-power" radios, with transmit powers lower than
> about 10mW).
>
> Roughly speaking, this means that, for the energy cost of exchanging 1
> bit, our system can alternatively compute 10-100 instructions.

Yes, it's impressive. Did you consider using ROHC (RObust Header 
Compression)?
It will allow you to significantly decrease size of TCP/UDP/IP headers.

Regards,
Valery Smyslov.