IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: SigComp Requirements (was Re: [rohc] RE: Default decompression algorithms)

zhigang.c.liu@nokia.com Wed, 27 February 2002 16:27 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA00439 for <rohc-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:27:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA29753; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:24:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA29717 for <rohc@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:24:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mgw-dax1.ext.nokia.com (mgw-dax1.ext.nokia.com [63.78.179.216]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA00301 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:24:22 -0500 (EST)
From: zhigang.c.liu@nokia.com
Received: from davir01nok.americas.nokia.com (davir01nok.americas.nokia.com [172.18.242.84]) by mgw-dax1.ext.nokia.com (Switch-2.1.0/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id g1RGOfG22235 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:24:41 -0600 (CST)
Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (unverified) by davir01nok.americas.nokia.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id <T5953874cc1ac12f25407a@davir01nok.americas.nokia.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:24:25 -0600
Received: from daebe005.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.18.242.203]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:23:55 -0600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: RE: SigComp Requirements (was Re: [rohc] RE: Default decompression algorithms)
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 10:23:54 -0600
Message-ID: <DE0842B293FC4847992F9EDF8D72E1ED24A269@daebe005.NOE.Nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: SigComp Requirements (was Re: [rohc] RE: Default decompression algorithms)
Thread-Index: AcG/nlwwFFDiB8I3SKOyqTj17QpVGwACeTOQ
To: <richard.price@roke.co.uk>, <Miguel.A.Garcia@ericsson.com>, <cabo@tzi.org>
Cc: <Lars-Erik.Jonsson@epl.ericsson.se>, <rohc@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Feb 2002 16:23:55.0271 (UTC) FILETIME=[26B3B970:01C1BFAB]
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by optimus.ietf.org id LAA29718
Sender: rohc-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: rohc-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Robust Header Compression <rohc.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: rohc@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi,

Just try to make things simple:

1) The major (if not only one) requirement of SigComp 
is to reduce latency. I agree with Carsten. 

2) Here we are talking about a simple optimization to
reduce the latency. Does anyone has comment on it?
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/rohc/current/msg00065.html

3) Now, the question is cost/gain evaluation. I've
made some attempt in
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/rohc/current/msg00064.html.
Comment? The hash size might be increased to 9 bytes (?).

4) Also, what about security? I don't see it is a problem
as long as the use of feedback (capability announcement)
does not create new risk. But do I missed something?

BR,
Zhigang

_______________________________________________
Rohc mailing list
Rohc@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email