[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [rohc] Liaison towards 3GPP
I agree with Lars and Magnus,
This discussion is out of the scope of the charter of ROHC.
As Magnus named it, "service-and-access-method-specific-solution
(vertical integrated solution)" are topics for discussions in the bodies
doing that stuff. Not IETF-ROHC!
/ Krister
Magnus Hartman wrote:
>
> Lars,
> One of my main points was that out-of-charter topics should be kept out of
> this list.
> And I am quite sure that I also wrote that...
> //Magnus
> ---
> Magnus Hartman
> Northstream AB
> Phone: +46(0)70 6475551
> http://www.northstream.se
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se
> [mailto:Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 1:59 PM
> To: Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se; rohc@cdt.luth.se;
> acasati@lucent.com; Magnus.Hartman@northstream.se
> Subject: RE: [rohc] Liaison towards 3GPP
>
> Hi!
> That is not correct.
> The disccusion on the mailing list is limited by the scope of the working
> group charter.
> If people wants to discuss out-of-charter topics, this could be made on
> other mailing list, not this one.
>
> Regards Lasse ----- Begin Included Message -----
>
> >From rohc-owner@basil.cdt.luth.se Fri Apr 7 13:36:56 2000
> X-Authentication-Warning: basil.cdt.luth.se: majordom set sender to
> owner-robhc using -f
> From: Magnus Hartman <Magnus.Hartman@northstream.se>
> Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 13:32:25 +0200
> To: Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se, rohc@cdt.luth.se, acasati@lucent.com
> Subject: RE: [rohc] Liaison towards 3GPP
> MIME-version: 1.0
> Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Hi,
>
> A few humble comments:
>
> I agree with Alessio that it is of relevance that ROHC is aware of what's
> happening in SMG2 and 3GPP (e.g. through Krister as proposed and others) .
> However, it must be kept clear, as Lars mentioned, that ROHC is developping
> header compression algorithm(s) and not methods for header stripping and
> header removal
> However, I think it is important though that the differences between these
> alternatives (to e.g. the applications) are clarified and understood,
> especially in SMG2 and 3GPP. Here ROCH might be one group that can help out
> as a group of expertice? This kind of work should however be kept outside
> this maillist (even though I am addressing it right now, sorry for that).
>
> In general, my comment is that ROCH is developping a HC algorithm for
> RTP/UDP/IP streams in general. In addition to this, some wireless solutions
> might need additional, highly optimized solutions for a specific service,
> e.g. voice, in their access NW (specific for this access NW). To me, this
> optimized solution does not need to have any "IP-transperancy", since it is
> a one-service-one-access-method-solution (e.g. AMR voice in GERAN). If one
> tries to do this optimized solution more generic, one would not gain much
> transparency, or one will end up with something similar to a header
> compression scheme. So, there are two solutions, which can exist in the same
> network: Header compression on one hand and a
> service-and-access-method-specific-solution (vertical integrated solution)
> on the other hand. If the latter is header stripping or header removal
> doesn't matter - there is nothing in between the header compression solution
> and the vertical solution.
>
> //Magnus Hartman
> ---
> Northstream AB
> Phone: +46(0)70 6475551
> http://www.northstream.se
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se
> [mailto:Lars.Westberg@era-t.ericsson.se]
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 12:12 PM
> To: rohc@cdt.luth.se; acasati@lucent.com
> Subject: RE: [rohc] Liaison towards 3GPP
>
> 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 -----
>
> ---
> Mailing list for Robust Header Compression WG
> Archive: http://www.cdt.luth.se/rohc/
>
> ---
> Mailing list for Robust Header Compression WG
> Archive: http://www.cdt.luth.se/rohc/
>
> ----- End Included Message -----
>
> ---
> Mailing list for Robust Header Compression WG
> Archive: http://www.cdt.luth.se/rohc/
--
__________________________________________________________
Krister Svanbro, M.Sc. - Ericsson Research
AWARE - Advanced Wireless Algorithm Research at Erisoft
Box 920 | Tel. : +46 920-20 20 77
SE-971 28 Luleå | Fax : +46 920-20 20 99
Sweden | GSM : +46 70-621 69 42
mailto:Krister.Svanbro@epl.ericsson.se