Re: [IPsec] [rohc] Comments on current RoHC over IPSec draft
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IPsec] [rohc] Comments on current RoHC over IPSec draft
- To: "Christou, Christos [USA]" <christou_chris at bah.com>
- Subject: Re: [IPsec] [rohc] Comments on current RoHC over IPSec draft
- From: "Carl Knutsson" <carlknut at gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:38:50 +0200
- Cc: ipsec at ietf.org, rohc at ietf.org, "Robert A. Stangarone Jr." <stangarr at spawar.navy.mil>, rohc-owner at ietf.org, Pasi.Eronen at nokia.com, Tero Kivinen <kivinen at iki.fi>, Kristofer Sandlund <kristofer.sandlund at ericsson.com>, stangarr at nkiconsulting.com
- Delivered-to: ietfarch-ipsec-web-archive at core3.amsl.com
- Delivered-to: ipsec at core3.amsl.com
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=ovNnbtkiNx9g1oW/d3xu4kVF/pmFgrXjZVKqEUG6IX8=; b=wkgXRuVYy0ylQFLUQ3Hh9O1uzdXGIkQaR4PZX7oRzJUSmTNHHCHL5JtTehpIxRtxzY 1RC1krti34mPQxk95OtE1/PwiCsG75EHkAJpNi9/q1bb0KHjbE2LrCbn5ZdJvyxCrl2R YjZksXE1MkFCoZ4wzcOAifAnuSlj03o9ub7TY=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=HXN6rDLPibb54sVPIC3pFwXx/Wcyb7mjqY3oQ552qn7SU91d4x4ZcC1vO6ZzlZIsXg 1pc3iQ/CvYuxBpXn3RvQuehBspPqj24Y7QOtfCCgBCn7enxt3Vh0G940VtlqGDpny8fP tVqT6lqeZ6ecdtsaV+KeDE6zzKSh2ZeQqQhAI=
- In-reply-to: <46E7B21EF4A45749B2432ABDCDE6FEA1039FA728 at MCLNEXVS12.resource.ds.bah.com>
- List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/ipsec>
- List-help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
- List-id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
- List-post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
- List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <mailman.35.1221505204.24769.rohc at ietf.org> <48D6A96E.2020403 at spawar.navy.mil> <37BDD2FAF2AEAE459C6C70FDC2892E4E03499E88 at MCLNEXVS05.resource.ds.bah.com> <A91F30A632473A47B40C18D2B107CA6F064E16BE at esealmw105.eemea.ericsson.se> <895583cb0809220349j332d9382l20707a4fbdb79bba at mail.gmail.com> <46E7B21EF4A45749B2432ABDCDE6FEA1039FA728 at MCLNEXVS12.resource.ds.bah.com>
- Sender: ipsec-bounces at ietf.org
Chris, Emre,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Christou, Christos [USA]
<christou_chris at bah.com> wrote:
-----8<---------
> As you have pointed out, the overhead varies based on profiles. Although
> it might not be as ideal, the overhead we would account for PMTU could
> be profile dependent. In other words, there will be an entry in the SPD
> for the profiles we would like to compress over particular SA's.
> Therefore, depending on the profiles identified, we could account for
> the maximum possible RoHC overhead in the PMTU calculation based on the
> profiles listed in the SPD.
>
agreed
> We will not include the MAX_HEADER parameter in our drafts.
>
agreed
/Calle
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.
