Fw: WG ACTION: Robust Header Compression (rohc)

["Lars-Erik Jonsson" <lars-erik.jonsson@ericsson.com>]

If you have not noticed...

/L-E



>A new working group has been formed in the Transport Area of the IETF.
>For additional information, contact the Area Directors
>or the WG Chair.
>
>
>Robust Header Compression (rohc)
>--------------------------------
>
> Current Status: Active Working Group
>
> Chair(s):
>     Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
>     Mikael Degermark <micke@sm.luth.se>
>
> Transport Area Director(s):
>     Scott Bradner  <sob@harvard.edu>
>     Vern Paxson  <vern@aciri.org>
>
> Transport Area Advisor:
>     Vern Paxson  <vern@aciri.org>
>
> Mailing Lists:
>     General Discussion:rohc@cdt.luth.se
>     To Subscribe:      majordomo@cdt.luth.se
>     Archive:           http://www.cdt.luth.se/rohc/
>
>Description of Working Group:
>
>Note: Erik Nordmark (nordmark@eng.sun.com) is serving as the Technical
>      Advior to the group.
>
>Due to limited bandwidth, IP/UDP/RTP/TCP packets sent over cellular
>links benefit considerably from header compression.  Existing header
>compression schemes (RFC 1144, RFC 2508) do not perform well over
>cellular links due to high error rates and long link roundtrip times,
>particularly as topologies and traffic patterns become more complex.  In
>addition, existing schemes do not compress TCP options such as SACK or
>Timestamps.
>
>The goal of ROHC is to develop header compression schemes that perform
>well over links with high error rates and long roundtrip times. The
>schemes must perform well for cellular links built using technologies
>such as WCDMA, EDGE, and CDMA-2000. However, the schemes should also be
>applicable to other future link technologies with high loss and long
>roundtrip times. Ideally, it should be possible to compress over
>unidirectional links.
>
>Good performance includes both minimal loss propagation and minimal
>added delay.  In addition to generic TCP and UDP/RTP compression,
>applications of particular interest are voice and low-bandwidth video.
>
>ROHC may develop multiple compression schemes, for example, some that
>are particularly suited to specific link layer technologies.  Schemes
>in addition to those listed in the milestones below may be added in
>consultation with the area directors.
>
>A robust header compression scheme must:
>
>* assure that when a header is compressed and then decompressed, the
>  result is semantically identical to the original;
>
>* perform well when the end-to-end path involves more than one
>  cellular link;
>
>* support IPv4 and IPv6.
>
>Creating more thorough requirements documents will be the first task
>of the WG.
>
>The working group shall maintain connections with other standardization
>organizations developing cellular technology for IP, such as 3GPP and
>3GPP-2, to ensure that its output fulfills their requirements and will
>be put to good use.
>
>In addition, the WG should develop a solid understanding of the
>impact that specific error patterns have on the compression schemes,
>and document guidelines to Layer 2 designers regarding what Layer 2
>features work best to assist Layer 3 and Layer 4 header compression.
>
>Finally, working group documents will address interactions with IPSEC
>and other security implications.
>
> Goals and Milestones:
>
>   Mar 00       Submit I-D on Requirements for IP/UDP/RTP header compression.
>
>   May 00       Submit I-D of layer-2 design guidelines.
>
>   May 00       Submit I-D(s) proposing IP/UDP/RTP header compression schemes.
>
>   May 00       Submit I-D of Requirements for IP/TCP header compression.
>
>   Jun 00       Requirements for IP/UDP/RTP header compression submitted to
>                IESG for publication as Informational.
>
>   Jul 00       Requirements for IP/TCP header compression submitted to IESG
>                for publication as Informational.
>
>   Jul 00       Resolve possibly multiple IP/UDP/RTP compression schemes into a
>                single scheme.
>
>   Aug 00       Submit I-D on IP/TCP header compression scheme.
>
>   Sep 00       Layer-2 design guidelines submitted to IESG for publication as
>                Informational.
>
>   Sep 00       IP/UDP/RTP header compression scheme submitted to IESG for
>                publication as Proposed Standard.
>
>   Dec 00       IP/TCP compression scheme submitted to IESG for publication
>
>   Jan 01       Possible recharter of WG to develop additional compression
>                schemes.
>
>