Re: [rohc] Feedback formats

Klaus Warnke <klaus.warnke@acticom.de> Thu, 16 July 2009 10:02 UTC

Return-Path: <klaus.warnke@acticom.de>
X-Original-To: rohc@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rohc@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 465383A682D for <rohc@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:02:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.946
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.946 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.653, BAYES_00=-2.599, CN_BODY_46=0.256, J_CHICKENPOX_22=0.6, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bnLxKI-eu-71 for <rohc@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:02:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.acticom-networks.com (mail.acticom-networks.com [87.106.254.214]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CF883A6768 for <rohc@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:02:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.acticom-networks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F6C11C00442; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:03:15 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at acticom-networks.com
Received: from mail.acticom-networks.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.acticom-networks.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fz5HnKFFbuf; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:03:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from godfather.bln.acticom.de (mail.oosoft.net [212.99.204.33]) by mail.acticom-networks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CFCA1C0043E; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:03:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by godfather.bln.acticom.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE75BF3ADA; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:03:02 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at bln.acticom.de
Received: from godfather.bln.acticom.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (godfather.bln.acticom.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fC6QTAIgwnRV; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:02:59 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.33.27] (tornado.bln.acticom.de [192.168.33.27]) by godfather.bln.acticom.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5994F3AD6; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:02:59 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4A5EFAD3.900@acticom.de>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 12:02:59 +0200
From: Klaus Warnke <klaus.warnke@acticom.de>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cai.wei2@zte.com.cn
References: <OFFE3A0258.C241EF00-ON482575F4.0009FFD2-482575F5.00315EB2@zte.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <OFFE3A0258.C241EF00-ON482575F4.0009FFD2-482575F5.00315EB2@zte.com.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="GB2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: rohc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rohc] Feedback formats
X-BeenThere: rohc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Robust Header Compression <rohc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:02:45 -0000

Hello cai,

I'm not completely sure what your mean.

First, there is a "short cut" to switch from U to O
mode (5.6.2.). In this case, a feedback-1 is sufficient, because
the receiving of any feedback shows to compressor that a feedback
channel is available and this is the precondition for bidirectional
optimistic mode.

Ideally the mode transition should be profile independent. But for the
IR/IR-DYN packet it isn't due to a design flaw. Only the dynamic chain
of the RTP Header contains the 'M' (5.7.7.6.) flag to transmit a
compression mode. For the other profiles you must use a extension-3.

Hope that helps.

If not, could you please explain the problem more detailed?

br
Klaus Warnke


cai.wei2@zte.com.cn wrote:
>
> RFC 3095 describes that when mode transitions, any feedback should be
> sent with mode transition parameter;
>
> at the same time, the feedback logic of decompressor in U/O/R mode
> also send feedback with mode parameter.
>
> there is a doubt that which case we could use feedback-1 in profile RTP?
>
> Thanks
> 	
> *caiwei 167981*
> LTE Development Department | LTE开发部
> 	*Product Marketing System *
> *产品市场体系*
> D3-06, ZTE Corp., No.10 South Tangyan Rd.,
> Hi-tech Industrial Development Zone, Xi'an,
> P.R.China, 710065
> Tel:+86-29-88724112, 15801916689
> Email:167981@zte.com.cn
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
> This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rohc mailing list
> Rohc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc
>