IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: TO COMPRESS OR NOT TO CMPRS (please reply)

Roy Pereira <rpereira@TimeStep.com> Wed, 19 February 1997 16:54 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id LAA24826 for ipsec-outgoing; Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:54:41 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=TimeStep_Corpora%l=TSNTSRV2-970219165930Z-641@tsntsrv2.timestep.com>
From: Roy Pereira <rpereira@TimeStep.com>
To: 'Bob Monsour' <rmonsour@earthlink.net>
Cc: "'dharkins@cisco.com'" <dharkins@cisco.com>, "'ipsec@tis.com'" <ipsec@tis.com>
Subject: RE: TO COMPRESS OR NOT TO CMPRS (please reply)
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 11:59:30 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

To me the biggest benefit of using compression within ESP is the fact
that I wont have to FRAGMENT as many packets as I would normally due to
the addition of ESP's 40+ byte overhead.

Fragmentation can slow down links considerably, especially when they are
low-speed (28.8k), thus anything that helps prevent fragmentation is a
"good thing".
>

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status