Re: Header Stripping
"Lars-Erik Jonsson" <Lars-Erik.Jonsson@ericsson.com> Fri, 08 October 1999 08:45 UTC
Message-ID: <030501bf1169$8336ace0$7fb08496@e00008639f5da.epl.ericsson.se>
From: Lars-Erik Jonsson <Lars-Erik.Jonsson@ericsson.com>
To: Ali Irfan-FIA225 <fia225@email1.wes.mot.com>, pilc@grc.nasa.gov, rem-conf@es.net
Cc: Natarajan Nat-ANN004 <ann004@email.mot.com>
Subject: Re: Header Stripping
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 10:45:45 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
Sender: owner-pilc@lerc.nasa.gov
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO
Content-Length: 2158
Lines: 59
Hello ! [To: PILC and AVT, AVT included since original message appered at the PILC-list] Ali, the answers to your questions should be ABSOLUTELY NOT and PROBABLY NOT. Header stripping is in general something really ugly and such ideas should not be accepted. However, there is a reason for why ideas like that come up. The reason is that in cellular environments, the header compression scheme for real-time (e.g. CRTP) of today are not working very well due to the problematic characteristics of the links. This was studied in the internet draft "draft-degermark-crtp-cellular". New header compression solutions are needed that are efficient and robust enough against packet losses and thereby making things like header stripping uninteresting. A new concept for header compression, ROCCO, has been proposed and the work can be studied at: www.ludd.luth.se/users/larsman/rocco It is important to speed up the progress of the header compression development and standardization before ideas like those about header stripping has come to far. Support for and participation in the ROCCO development is needed /Lars-Erik Jonsson >Question: >1. Should a recommendation for header stripping/regeneration be allowed >in any IP network? >2. Also, should this issue be dealt with in the performance >implications draft? > >Background: > >I was just reading a Cellular network proposal (the name of group or doc. is >not important) for an IP network. For air-link optimization, >header-compression is recommend. Fine. In addition an option for >header-striping and regeneration down-stream is also allowed. A statement >in the doc. states, > > "Reducing of the header size is done by removing redundancy in the >originally coded header information AND/OR REMOVING HEADER FIELD INFORMATION >AND THERBY LOSING FUNCTIONALITY" > >This disturbed me. I want to make a contribution to the group to delete such >text, but would first like to get some feedback from this mailing list. > >Note: the doc. does state that these options are to be investigated and a >final recommendation made. So header-stripping option is not set in stone, >yet. > >Irfan Ali >Motorola
- Header Stripping Ali Irfan-FIA225
- Re: Header Stripping Omar Elloumi
- Re: Header Stripping Lars-Erik Jonsson
- Re: Header Stripping Omar Elloumi
- Re: Header Stripping Lars-Erik Jonsson