This Working Group did not meet
Last Modified: 2003-05-12
Another consequence of low bandwidth links is long session setup delays when text-based signaling protocols, such as SIP and SDP, are used. These delays can be significantly reduced by compressing not only the headers, but also the signaling information.
The goal of ROHC is to develop generic header compression schemes that perform well over links with high error rates and long roundtrip times, as well as related signaling compression schemes. 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 compression scheme must:
* assure that the result after decompression is semantically identical to the uncompressed original;
* perform well when the end-to-end path involves more than one cellular link;
* support IPv4 and IPv6.
* provide benefit in the presence of IPSEC.
Creating more thorough requirements documents will be the first task of the WG for each of its specific areas of work, which are:
* 0-byte improvements to RTP header compression
* TCP header compression
* Signaling compression
* SCTP header compression
In addition, the WG will work on MIBs for its compression schemes, as well as the sheperding of RFC3095 to draft standard.
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. This work is in coordination with the PILC WG.
Some of the schemes developed in ROHC will be used in wider contexts than just the specific link technologies discussed. The working group will ensure the applicability in particular of the TCP and signaling compression schemes to the general Internet. This includes considering the applicability of the technologies under consideration to open-source implementations.
Finally, working group documents will address interactions with IPSEC and other security implications.
Done | Submit I-D on Requirements for IP/UDP/RTP header compression. | |
Done | Submit I-D of layer-2 design guidelines. | |
Done | Submit I-D(s) proposing IP/UDP/RTP header compression schemes. | |
Done | Submit I-D of Requirements for IP/TCP header compression. | |
Done | Requirements for IP/UDP/RTP header compression submitted to IESG for publication as Informational. | |
Done | Resolve possibly multiple IP/UDP/RTP compression schemes into a single scheme. | |
Done | Submit I-D on IP/TCP header compression scheme. | |
Done | IP/UDP/RTP header compression scheme submitted to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. | |
Done | Layer-2 design guidelines submitted to IESG for publication as Informational. | |
Done | Initial draft on general signaling compression security analysis. | |
Done | Requirements and assumptions for signaling compression | |
Done | Signaling compression scheme submitted to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard, including security approach for SIP compression usage. | |
Done | General signaling compression security analysis submitted to IESG for publication as Informational. | |
Nov 02 | ROHC MIB submitted to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. | |
Nov 02 | I-Ds of ROHC IP/UDP/RTP bis, framework and profiles separated. | |
Jan 03 | LLA mapping examples submitted to IESG for publication as Informational. | |
Feb 03 | Requirements for IP/TCP header compression submitted to IESG for publication as Informational. | |
Feb 03 | IP/TCP compression scheme submitted to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard | |
Mar 03 | ROHC framework submitted to IESG for publication as Draft Standard. | |
Mar 03 | ROHC IP/UDP/RTP schemes submitted to IESG for publication as Draft Standard. | |
Apr 03 | ROHC UDP Lite schemes submitted to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. | |
Jun 03 | IP/SCTP compression scheme submitted to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard. | |
Aug 03 | Possible recharter of WG to develop additional compression schemes |
RFC | Status | Title |
---|---|---|
RFC3095 | PS | RObust Header Compression (ROHC) |
RFC3096 | I | Requirements for robust IP/UDP/RTP header compression |
RFC3242 | PS | A Link-Layer Assisted ROHC Profile for IP/UDP/RTP |
RFC3243 | I | Requirements and assumptions for ROHC 0-byte IP/UDP/RTP compression |
RFC3241 | PS | ROHC over PPP |
RFC3408 | PS | Zero-byte Support for Reliable Bidirectional Mode (R-mode) in Extended Link-Layer Assisted RObust Header Compression (ROHC) Profile |
RFC3409 | I | Lower Layer Guidelines for Robust RTP/UDP/IP Header Compression |
RFC3320 | PS | Signaling Compression |
RFC3321 | I | SigComp - Extended Operations |
RFC3322 | I | Signaling Compression Requirements & Assumptions |