IETF Logo Mail Archive

[rohc] Question regarding SIGCOMP

kishore sowdi <kishore_r_s@yahoo.co.in> Wed, 23 May 2012 06:16 UTC

Return-Path: <kishore_r_s@yahoo.co.in>
X-Original-To: rohc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rohc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC97121F84DF for <rohc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 May 2012 23:16:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jy-YPUCHY9AK for <rohc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 May 2012 23:16:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm22-vm7.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com (nm22-vm7.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com [106.10.151.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 51ABC21F84D5 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 May 2012 23:16:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [106.10.166.112] by nm22.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 May 2012 06:16:15 -0000
Received: from [106.10.151.239] by tm1.bullet.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 May 2012 06:16:15 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1023.mail.sg3.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 23 May 2012 06:16:15 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 613156.36470.bm@omp1023.mail.sg3.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 3136 invoked by uid 60001); 23 May 2012 06:16:15 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.in; s=s1024; t=1337753775; bh=MmBHtoKU/GYZCpdt/1P8WBpGD3J5VCRr+WOLckKkxsw=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dy8Pz9mA0/h+2SEVV57HAM4Qy1nUFfdujdF+x1buF3ihZWMqBNt3E+6ZNHj7sXpiyYmAchhFaWB0P/aSh1CVrRmdhbcZNBfwyosYggquSE4ApCf0mAxbV57I8HqWzrIRhKjG2E0LHQRmqORWUAV/xsFOrLp6YBJK2nkN8yscRwU=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.in; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=0qVfVcrZg34WseXzBwGwYW4suzb4KOxFsXc2Q2iBmXyGD0BjkmtxZMvdvuLMTc70Rb40GqF6rodv9+JPw+yYPkn11DIH86XiGWlYUSfZKsiiwuj0sz4J5uitzH6Ic0TYXH+TTGySowgr+x4iq9R3GW0otfGRBBzqyAxYCdnRwM4=;
X-YMail-OSG: ws8DVbMVM1mfm94CqYJyutujxv9nI6__w6SIbrrwtdqtOib oGay6Fvw6qoFuK0RhPWQvf0qGLIOg1X1snDGPXtPQ9KHhBfb0.r.bQxheA1o iO2MtGAg4kMH9J.AYboi1z9.5lt5DuGS8iWLjDo6bSYbnUAYG1uA3GDItzII Zpfm.kWV72gKZobZvzvH8H.sfqvzwDlknj0d_otPf_aqFJudyTmQMBS1vC.u G1bV91KAm6_58nUpGyp1nZCxc.sPTkhiO1r1xcMV0jr2rVbxGN6Cf9h9QoR4 dnMeB2NynRrdkiUD2Gu9kWbicUvz1Hl0Jdi4XN3kO9qQSIvBPX.S1Pdsrj1d dJXrOMVIhYS5fe0jilPcg957Yw9bWAhqndBJIZINxJn7UmhuvdIDkeo2aIcg .8OyclVyP2AGBaf3z7QRH4USRhMFjp7LPpQiZkg--
Received: from [125.21.230.132] by web193205.mail.sg3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 23 May 2012 14:16:15 SGT
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.118.349524
Message-ID: <1337753775.70884.YahooMailNeo@web193205.mail.sg3.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 14:16:15 +0800
From: kishore sowdi <kishore_r_s@yahoo.co.in>
To: "rohc@ietf.org" <rohc@ietf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-724232154-148890994-1337753775=:70884"
Subject: [rohc] Question regarding SIGCOMP
X-BeenThere: rohc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: kishore sowdi <kishore_r_s@yahoo.co.in>
List-Id: Robust Header Compression <rohc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rohc>, <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rohc>
List-Post: <mailto:rohc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc>, <mailto:rohc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 06:17:54 -0000

Hi ,

I am using SIGCOMP to compress/decompress SIP application.

SIP Client is uploading UVDM bytecode in all messages it sends to server.
Below is the message exchange between SIP Client and Server,
 

Client                                                                                 Server
1) REG (Client sends bytecode) ---->

                                                                                      (2) <----  401(Server sends byte code)                                            
 
3) REG  (Client sends bytecode) ---->    
 
                                                                                      (4) <----- 200 OK (Server sends byte code)  

5) SUBSCRIBE (Client sends bytecode)----->

                                                                                      (6) <----- 200 OK (Server sends partial state identifier )

---> At (6), server tries to access state, by giving partial state identifiers, which it gave in state create at step (4) as per "UDVM Execution trace".... 
---> when client receives (6), it is failing to decompress it saying state not found....
---> (6) gets re-transmitted many times.....

However at (4), server has sent only one STATE-CREATE instruction in bytecode ... 
But, packet sniffer(wireshark) shows in "UDVM Execution Trace" having 3 state create requests... 

My question is , why there are no 3 STATE-CREATE instructions in bytecode at (4) ??...
I am confused because "UDVM Execution Trace" having 3 state create requests... and there are no corresponding STATE-CREATE instructions at (4)..

Since Client has not received 3 STATE-CREATE's in bytecode at (4), it has not created those states and suddenly at (6), when server refers to that state giving "partial state id", client fails to match it to the state.

Please help in identifying the issue...

Regards,
Kishore

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email