[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[PWE3] Re: Header Compression over MPLS & Allison's DISCUSS Comment on PWE3 IANA Allocation Draft



Hi,

Sorry for stiring this up. What I don't understand is how we can register any of the HC over PW types now. We don't have any document that specifies how any of those header compressions protocols are used on pseudo wires. The references provide in the registration does not define how you could actually use it. So what is the reason for regestering them now. Why can't the registration wait until we have a concensus on how HC is actually accomplished over PW?

Cheers

Magnus

Allison Mankin wrote:
Hi,

In a bit of off-list discussion, we had two threads:

1. would it be practical to assume that the RFC 3544
protocol would be present for IPHC/CRTP eCRTP? The answer
is that the implementations are not restricting themselves
to that design, so Kristofer Sandlun's thoughtful codepoint suggestion isn't an option.


2. are there some very pressing reasons why vendors cannot
   use eCRTP and find themselves using CRTP?  The answer to
   this turns out to be yes, and turns out to be
   sometimes IPR, which is certainly not an unknown finding
   for IETF...

I agreed to put cRTP back in the registrations with a note
that reflects that the use of cRTP has to be an informed tradeoff
(because the later IETF documents say that cRTP has risks for
general use).  I've cc'd the AVT chairs because they may want
to take the new protocol takeup info into account.  Of course,
no specifics - that's also not unknown for IETF.

Here's Yet Another List of these - maybe we are looking at our last one :)

------
0x001A ROHC Transport Header-compressed Packets [RFC3095, draft-ietf-rohc-over-reordering-03.txt]
0x001B eCRTP Transport Header-compressed Packets [RFC3545]
0x001C IPHC Transport Header-compressed Packets [RFC2507]
0x001D cRTP Transport Header-compressed Packets [RFC2508][Note 1]




[Note 1]   Although CRTP is viewed as having risks for a number
  PW environments due to misordering and loss, it is registered
  because of markets where commercial issues lead to its choice
  In these circumstances, it must be implemented and deployed
  with care.

-- Add Informational Reference to draft-ietf-rohc-over-reordering-03.txt
------

I added the i-d that gives the advice about improving ROHC for
reordering to the references for ROHC. This was a good idea derived from Kristopher's email.


I couldn't decide there was urgency to record Kristofer's additional guidance
IPHC and eCRTP here. But his expertise on these convinced me that IPHC can
be there without causing trouble,


So I hope this is it for this material.

Now, about part 1 of my Discuss, if Luca or the group will respond, I'd
love to settle this.

Allison



--

Magnus Westerlund

Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVA/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone +46 8 4048287
Torshamsgatan 23           | Fax   +46 8 7575550
S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund at ericsson.com

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3 at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3