IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sip-ops] [dispatch] SIP-CLF: Results on ASCII vs. binary representation

Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com> Wed, 29 April 2009 20:44 UTC

Return-Path: <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
X-Original-To: sip-ops@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-ops@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5078C3A71AD; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:44:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.544
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.544 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.055, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 5a7z95gn+-Wq; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:44:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from etmail.acmepacket.com (etmail.acmepacket.com [216.41.24.6]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 791873A71A7; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:44:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.7) by etmail.acmepacket.com (216.41.24.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.340.0; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:45:40 -0400
Received: from mail.acmepacket.com ([127.0.0.1]) by mail ([127.0.0.1]) with mapi; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:45:39 -0400
From: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
To: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@alcatel-lucent.com>, Theo Zourzouvillys <theo@crazygreek.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:45:38 -0400
Thread-Topic: [dispatch] SIP-CLF: Results on ASCII vs. binary representation
Thread-Index: AcnJCRuiERgOVGj2SZe+RYbB1Ujd2AAAWJig
Message-ID: <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC31915E3E5B1@mail>
References: <49F864E8.20005@alcatel-lucent.com> <167dfb9b0904290847u322161d5h3da18771344436ec@mail.gmail.com> <49F8988C.9050900@alcatel-lucent.com> <167dfb9b0904291203m4e74ab39s5f83cfa1be9799a0@mail.gmail.com> <49F8B827.3060501@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <49F8B827.3060501@alcatel-lucent.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "sip-ops@ietf.org" <sip-ops@ietf.org>, "dispatch@ietf.org" <dispatch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sip-ops] [dispatch] SIP-CLF: Results on ASCII vs. binary representation
X-BeenThere: sip-ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Operations <sip-ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-ops>, <mailto:sip-ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-ops>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-ops>, <mailto:sip-ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:44:19 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dispatch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Vijay K. Gurbani
> 
> So after tweaking all kinds of optimizations for binary CLF, the
> best we can do is approach ASCII CLF without any optimizations.
> This much no one will dispute, I hope.

Depends on how you plan to disambiguate legal characters in the fields from the field separators.  In binary the length field removes the need for disambiguation, or a CRLF itself does it (depending on the format).  In ascii, if you have to escape characters, then that escaping and de-escaping could be a big hit.

But anyway, I think the real question that needs to be answered *first* is "what is the purpose of the CLF?"  What is it going to help admins do?  Is it for troubleshooting, or for registration audit logging, or for IDS systems, etc?

-hadriel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email