Re: [MEXT] [Mipshop] TLV header in DSMIP
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [MEXT] [Mipshop] TLV header in DSMIP
Hi teco,
On 04/04/2008, at 12:54 AM, Teco Boot wrote:
> Hi Hesham,
> I posted before on using TLV-encap for tunnel optimization (e.g.
> header
> compression).
> I think type values can be requested at time of defining protocols
> for this.
> But I think tunnel optimization needs a more efficient TLV
> structure: 1
> octet for only the type is needed, the other 3 octets are overhead and
> should be eliminated.
> Any objection mentioning such a usage? If not, we block something that
> really makes sense.
=> While i sympathise with your idea, I think that, as I said before,
the benfits are minimal. Please note
that practically we don't expect this TLV header to be used by MNs. So
compression is not needed.
Especially, at this stage (including the time you raised it), I don't
think it's worth delaying things for it.
That's my opinion anyway.
Hesham
>
> Teco.
>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: mext-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:mext-bounces at ietf.org] Namens
>> Hesham
>> Soliman
>> Verzonden: donderdag 3 april 2008 10:45
>> Aan: mext at ietf.org
>> Onderwerp: [MEXT] TLV header in DSMIP
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> During one of the reviews for DSMIP the issue came up regarding the
>> TLV header Type field values and how the current spec doesn't
>> describe
>> how it can be used for IPsec.
>> After looking into this a bit I don't see why we would need IPsec for
>> this. We originally defined because people wanted to use GRE so the
>> format would be:
>> IP
>> UDP
>> GRE
>> IP
>> ...etc
>>
>> It seems like it would be sufficient to only define this now for GRE
>> and if someone comes up with a need for using IP/IPsec directly after
>> the TLV header they can define that behaviour and request a new type
>> value.
>>
>> So the new draft would only allocate one value for GRE.
>>
>> Any objections to this ? please respond quickly, we need to finish
>> this ASAP.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hesham
>> _______________________________________________
>> MEXT mailing list
>> MEXT at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> Mipshop at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
_______________________________________________
MEXT mailing list
MEXT at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.