[rohc] ROHC feedback
Biplab Sarkar <bsarkar@starentnetworks.com> Tue, 03 April 2007 05:10 UTC
Return-path: <rohc-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HYbHw-0003zr-62; Tue, 03 Apr 2007 01:10:36 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HYbHt-0003zj-SJ for rohc@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2007 01:10:33 -0400
Received: from mx0.starentnetworks.com ([12.38.223.203]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HYbHq-00063e-GH for rohc@ietf.org; Tue, 03 Apr 2007 01:10:33 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mx0.starentnetworks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C55C90034 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:10:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mx0.starentnetworks.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx0.starentnetworks.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 03222-15 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from exchtewks1.starentnetworks.com (exchtewks1.starentnetworks.com [12.33.233.52]) by mx0.starentnetworks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for <rohc@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from exchindia3.starentnetworks.com ([10.6.7.5]) by exchtewks1.starentnetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 3 Apr 2007 01:10:22 -0400
Received: from bsarkar ([10.6.7.222]) by exchindia3.starentnetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 3 Apr 2007 10:40:07 +0530
From: Biplab Sarkar <bsarkar@starentnetworks.com>
To: rohc@ietf.org
Organization: Starent Networks
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 10:40:10 +0530
Message-Id: <1175577011.8987.25.camel@bsarkar-desktop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Apr 2007 05:10:07.0741 (UTC) FILETIME=[58C4F2D0:01C775AE]
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.2.1 (20041222) at mx0.starentnetworks.com
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4
Subject: [rohc] ROHC feedback
X-BeenThere: rohc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: bsarkar@starentnetworks.com
List-Id: Robust Header Compression <rohc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc>, <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:rohc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc>, <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2057016989=="
Errors-To: rohc-bounces@ietf.org
All, I believe one of the short comings of the ROHC feedback mechanism is that it might get wrongly interpreted at the other end. Since the CID might get reused because of the limitation imposed my MAX_CID. And I have seen a roundabout delay of about 4-5 packets typically. So, its very likely going to get mis-interpreted. There should be some restrictions on the re-use of CID. Thanks Biplab ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Starent Networks India Pvt Ltd. 5th Floor,Surya Chambers, No 124 Murgeshpalya, Airport Road Bangalore, 560017 Ph: +91-80-40109512 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
_______________________________________________ Rohc mailing list Rohc@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc
- [rohc] ROHC feedback Biplab Sarkar
- RE: [rohc] ROHC feedback Kristofer Sandlund (LU/EAB)
- RE: [rohc] ROHC feedback Biplab Sarkar
- RE: [rohc] ROHC feedback Kristofer Sandlund (LU/EAB)
- Re: [rohc] ROHC feedback Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rohc] ROHC feedback Biplab Sarkar