RE: [rohc] Constant IP-ID in the RTP Profile(0x0001)

"Kristofer Sandlund" <kristofer.sandlund@ericsson.com> Thu, 03 January 2008 12:01 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 1JAOlh-0005pA-5a; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:01:49 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAOlf-0005o9-SK for rohc@ietf.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:01:47 -0500
Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.60]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAOlf-0005Ma-2U for rohc@ietf.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:01:47 -0500
Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 3221A209A0; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:01:46 +0100 (CET)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb3c-af796bb0000030cf-e1-477cceaa5afa
Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 075AA205E5; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:01:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from esealmw105.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.200.68]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:01:45 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [rohc] Constant IP-ID in the RTP Profile(0x0001)
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:01:44 +0100
Message-ID: <A91F30A632473A47B40C18D2B107CA6F04F2F60E@esealmw105.eemea.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <1199360879.23248.49.camel@INDBNG1172.bng.ind.starentnetworks.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [rohc] Constant IP-ID in the RTP Profile(0x0001)
Thread-Index: AchN/fxtbp72V6EqTsyhDY5vCuL5/QAAcCLA
References: <66E8AEE9980BB44CA5FCAD39EBA56AC60340B281@CHN-HCLT-EVS02.HCLT.CORP.HCL.IN> <1199360879.23248.49.camel@INDBNG1172.bng.ind.starentnetworks.com>
From: Kristofer Sandlund <kristofer.sandlund@ericsson.com>
To: bsarkar@starentnetworks.com, "Gangadharan G, TLS-Chennai" <Gangadharang@hcl.in>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2008 12:01:45.0826 (UTC) FILETIME=[6992E420:01C84E00]
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 057ebe9b96adec30a7efb2aeda4c26a4
Cc: rohc@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: rohc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
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>
Errors-To: rohc-bounces@ietf.org

Biplab,

I would not recommend such a behavior since that break compression
transparency, which is bad. You can't just assume that the endpoint
does ignore the IP-ID although that is the likely behavior.
For 3095-based profiles, a zero IP-ID should be compressed using RND=1.

/Kristofer

Biplab Sarkar <mailto:bsarkar@starentnetworks.com> wrote on den 3
januari 2008 12:48 :

> * PGP Signed by an unknown key: 01/03/2008 at 12:47:59 PM
> 
> Hi Gangadharan,
> 
> IP-ID can be over-written with the value of RTP-SN at the
> compressor before compression for all "un-fragmented" IPv4
> packets. This will enhance the compression.  Since IP-ID is
> used in IP fragmentation, we can basically ignore its real
> value for "un-fragmented" IP packets.
> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> Biplab Sarkar
> 
> On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 17:07 +0530, Gangadharan G, TLS-Chennai wrote:
> 
> 	Hi All,
> 
> 
> 
> 	In the Linux Suse 10.1 machine, the value of the IP-ID
> in the IPv4 header is always zero (i.e., constant) in the
> entire IP datagrams.
> 
> 	The IP-ID Encoding, as per RFC 3095, of the RTP profile
> doesn't handle this case (constant IP-ID).
> 
> 
> 
> 	Also this issue had been discussed in the mailing list.
> 
> 	http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rohc/current/msg01502.html
> 
> 
> 
> 	When I searched in the Internet, I found few proposed
> solutions (yet to read them).
> 
> 
> (draft-ietf-rohc-rfc3095bis-improvements-03.txt,
> draft-kapoor-rohc-rtp-new-requirements-00.txt
> <http://www.potaroo.net/ietf/idref/draft-kapoor-rohc-rtp-new-r
equirements/rfcmarkup?repository=/away/ietf&url=/away/ietf/all-ids/draft
->
kapoor-rohc-rtp-new-requirements-00.txt> , 
> 
> 	 RFC 3643 -- A Compression Profile for IP)
> 
> 
> 
> 	Please let me know the solution/standard that everyone
> is following for this issue in the RTP Profile.
> 
> 
> 
> 	Thanks,
> 
> 	Gangadharan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DISCLAIMER:
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The contents of this e-mail and any attachment(s) are
> confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only.
> It shall not attach any liability on the originator or HCL or
> its affiliates. Any views or opinions presented in
> this email are solely those of the author and may not
> necessarily reflect the opinions of HCL or its affiliates.
> Any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure,
> modification, distribution and / or publication of
> this message without the prior written consent of the author
> of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this email in error please delete it and notify the
> sender immediately. Before opening any mail and
> attachments please check them for viruses and defect.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 	_______________________________________________
> 	Rohc mailing list
> 	Rohc@ietf.org
> 	https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc
> 
> * Unknown Key
> * 0x6D543EEE (L)

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