RE: [rohc] Liaison towards 3GPP

[Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se (Lars Westberg T/NI 2)]

Hi!
Header compresssion is an issue for IETF due to the existance of IP.
Interworking is not a part of the ROHC-group charter. 

If we compare this discussion with the VoMPLS-BOF. Several 
IAB-menbers pointed out the importance of IP in the IETF-protocol 
development. 

Regards Lars Westberg
        Ericsson Research  

----- Begin Included Message -----

From rohc-owner@basil.cdt.luth.se Fri Apr  7 11:29:46 2000
X-Authentication-Warning: basil.cdt.luth.se: majordom set sender to owner-robhc using -f
From: "Casati, Alessio (Alessio)" <acasati@lucent.com>
To: rohc@cdt.luth.se
Subject: RE: [rohc] Liaison towards 3GPP
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 10:29:01 +0100 
MIME-Version: 1.0


> This has nothing to do with the work done in ROHC.
> 
Yes, but knowing what is happening in SMG2 is useful
input to the group, I think.

>  Header stripping is the same
> as not using IP-end-to-end and is therefore not an IETF issue. 
> 
Let's say that this may introduce some loss at the RTP level,
but In the end IP SRC and DST addr are unchanged, as well as UDP
SRC and DST port. A RTP header is delivered to the application too
(though maybe different from the one sent by the source).

> If you want to
> keep a specialized soultion for voice that is your problem.
> 
If I was the only man in the industry, yes.

>  Header stripping is
> not header compression.
> 
That's why they've been given two different names, I understand :).


alessio

---
Mailing list for Robust Header Compression WG
Archive: http://www.cdt.luth.se/rohc/


----- End Included Message -----