[Sframe] Overhead analysis
Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> Thu, 02 February 2023 22:49 UTC
Return-Path: <rlb@ipv.sx>
X-Original-To: sframe@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sframe@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67316C15952A for <sframe@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 14:49:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ipv-sx.20210112.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pvTKvnJXXn_T for <sframe@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 14:49:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32b.google.com (mail-wm1-x32b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA79AC1575CC for <sframe@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Feb 2023 14:49:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32b.google.com with SMTP id k8-20020a05600c1c8800b003dc57ea0dfeso4832024wms.0 for <sframe@ietf.org>; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 14:49:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipv-sx.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Hmo4Ff99ZWFm2tHMJ4GrxrHRNhrlwQMoDYgI/Zs12tU=; b=K1flDglPJRpM4abuGR764mapWblwXF7Z8QYcECah7jmQE7vAJWfrY06e2FVwJ7iVnV AhoKeloE9v5su93NqAaqB452+rrpvuQIGcpDsYMTtGdC9o3AobJYAjwxPwxAPFrU9wT4 nhn8TJoSP/NiZLsjKiYaX4iDqTY6wP71fPsyNi8/aOXAA/RJuVvZ5d3+gkSDHFN0nrRj aqzbaenj5ewhLdrtaI8F+ZDRzJU9FLD9/OuaX8qLk1l+ULgf8psJBbdSNP6cvpX6kK+U JObCdZjKVGbQNr/XajJioexMnXNNsL9KHQRbGvoWZ+etChx4TcnL+4NCktTc7llgt018 kfAQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Hmo4Ff99ZWFm2tHMJ4GrxrHRNhrlwQMoDYgI/Zs12tU=; b=bJW2tcd1TSYUq2IseeKCYCJehiNBIHDFOvFJc6CSbGtzRkzPj6TJyZfXyJTlii752B 1njSIfueSBcATcIlbnp79wG5G4c0dCAUfJeiqYtIO3C6HApGwuOHvt6BNjl1JG8Sl6qw h2d4swiXbYuswqM9/3/9vcdfRWXpcXgzqdlmkhM4f1/Qazy2idjrPrKIfieQiNZk2yrg rw6fcZ1FhBwaGOGe0Yx09fNuvwbJvXyfZiFhHXPSwAMm7HaN2MPFFgTxhGbLif3mtoNy 5eH8NHfJXxHEyGK94ld735xvvMFStkIaBKGYPyCwac7132B16ajF3NdeDNTyLDtZn+lE WbiA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWvs2n6XCKxJ6zxvX5PjO5S46CIa2J+9OCxVs+04tySL2WgvEq0 spcujLhPA9RfkNjTPVRzfidZz7NFoVJUn5Rc2EdcUmib9DUJ7UR+
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+NHBoDzgUjT1YNrGNKwxdSGxnrcYXOT5ydtnrK/6uPQvkzX+hiTbG6d4YtsC59PGk8CtF+ohV2M6IweLww1xQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:5111:b0:3dc:5a0f:6a6a with SMTP id o17-20020a05600c511100b003dc5a0f6a6amr281874wms.73.1675378161338; Thu, 02 Feb 2023 14:49:21 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 17:49:10 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL02cgTioov4_qPRQyq7vKfM7BpfbEH=okARBgeMmjAosM69OA@mail.gmail.com>
To: sframe@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002bde0305f3bf60e4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sframe/idUcbJHvYmDNzJjUVHxdbQYi3ig>
Subject: [Sframe] Overhead analysis
X-BeenThere: sframe@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Secure Media Frames <sframe.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sframe>, <mailto:sframe-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sframe/>
List-Post: <mailto:sframe@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sframe-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sframe>, <mailto:sframe-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2023 22:49:24 -0000
Hi all, I just submitted a couple of editorial PRs (which I just merged because they were fixing bugs or doing minor rearrangements), as well as a more substantive PR that re-does the overhead analysis in the draft: https://github.com/sframe-wg/sframe/pull/95 It would be good to know if folks (a) find the new approach useful, (b) prefer the old approach, (c) think we should do something different, or (d) think we should just delete this section altogether. Feel free to respond here or on the PR. Mainly just posting here for visibility. Cheers, --Richard
- [Sframe] Overhead analysis Richard Barnes
- Re: [Sframe] Overhead analysis Youenn Fablet
- Re: [Sframe] Overhead analysis Richard Barnes