Re: [tcpm] Separate header checksums and WiFi

Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU> Thu, 13 March 2008 02:51 UTC

Return-Path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-tcpm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tcpm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2437F28C2EC; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.46
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.46 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.023, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 3TcvfRz6hwMy; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D6128C769; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:51:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8B0A28C2EC for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:51:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
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 8Bz+nxo17W8X for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E5F528C4B9 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([63.133.180.130]) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m2D2mGrS005572 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:48:18 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <47D895C5.8080406@isi.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:47:33 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@ISI.EDU>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Welzl <michael.welzl@uibk.ac.at>
References: <1170256423.4805.611.camel@lap10-c703.uibk.ac.at> <20070131164323.GD16985@elb.elitists.net> <45C0CE79.4040303@isi.edu> <1205333759.3719.109.camel@pc105-c703.uibk.ac.at>
In-Reply-To: <1205333759.3719.109.camel@pc105-c703.uibk.ac.at>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, iccrg@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Separate header checksums and WiFi
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0617258240=="
Sender: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

Very nice. Congrats!

Joe

Michael Welzl wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> [ Answering an email from January 2007 (my, my, how time flies  :-(  ),
> and including ICCRG because I recently mentioned this study there,
> so it might be of interest to them too ]
> 
> We finally did that:
> 
> Michael Welzl, Mattia Rossi, Andrea Fumagalli, Marco Tacca, "TCP/IP over
> IEEE 802.11b WLAN: the Challenge of Harnessing Known-Corrupt Data",
> accepted for publication, IEEE ICC 2008 (International Conference on
> Communications), 19-23 May 2008, Beijing, China.
> 
> Available from
> http://www.welzl.at/research/projects/corruption/index.html
> (until somebody tells me that I misread the legal bits and
> am not allowed to do so)
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 09:14 -0800, Joe Touch wrote:
>> Beyond what Ethan is suggesting, this is useful to write up more fully
>> and publish, e.g., at Globecom or ICC. Negative results, as Ethan notes,
>> are critical to the community as a whole.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> Ethan Blanton wrote:
>>> Michael Welzl spake unto us the following wisdom:
>>>> I figured that the only convincing way to prove him
>>>> wrong is to actually do a real-life test. I did, and
>>>> proved him right  :)  that is, disabling checksums for
>>>> parts of packets doesn't yield much of a benefit in
>>>> WiFi networks, where it seems that frames are delivered
>>>> in an all-or-nothing fashion.
>>> I have to applaud this move.  All too often we only talk about the
>>> things we did that *worked*, and the same questions about things that
>>> any number of people would tell you doesn't work come up over and
>>> over.  For this particular topic, there is now a citation, so the next
>>> guy won't have to go try it himself.  Thank you.
>>>
>>> Ethan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> tcpm mailing list
>>> tcpm@ietf.org
>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>> _______________________________________________
>> tcpm mailing list
>> tcpm@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm