Subject: [rohc] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-pelletier-rohc-udplite-01.txt

From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 14:30:18 +0100

ROHCers,

Last year in Minneapolis, an individual draft for a UDP-Lite profile
was discussed, and we also agreed to make it a WG draft. However, the
work got delayed for various reasons, and the author also wanted to
make significant changes to the document. Therefore, we decided the
updated draft should stay as an individual draft in this version,
although the intention is to soon make it a WG document, and the work
should hereafter continue on the list.

Please express your opinions about this draft, especially opinions 
about using this document as the starting point for the ROHC UDP-Lite
profile development.

Thanks!
/Lars-Erik

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: den 3 februari 2003 12:44
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-pelletier-rohc-udplite-01.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.

	Title		: RObust Header Compression (ROHC):Profiles for UDP Lite
	Author(s)	: G. Pelletier
	Filename	: draft-pelletier-rohc-udplite-01.txt
	Pages		: 19
	Date		: 2003-1-31
	
This document defines ROHC (Robust Header Compression) profiles for
compression of RTP/UDP-Lite/IP packets (Real-Time Transport Protocol,
User Datagram Protocol Lite, Internet Protocol) and UDP-Lite/IP.
These profiles are defined based on their differences with the
profiles specified in [RFC-3095] for UDP [RFC-768].
Although both transport protocols are very similar, ROHC profiles
must be defined separately for robust compression of UDP-Lite headers
because it does not share protocol identifier with UDP. Also, the
UDP-Lite Checksum Coverage field does not share the semantics of the
corresponding UDP Length field and as a consequence cannot always be
inferred anymore.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-pelletier-rohc-udplite-01.txt

To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to 
ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-pelletier-rohc-udplite-01.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-pelletier-rohc-udplite-01.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
_______________________________________________
Rohc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc

---

From: "Price, Richard" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:19:36 -0000

> With this in mind, I suggest that the draft be read as a totally new
> document, as not much from version 00 is left in version 01.

Ok, I guess I'll have to read the whole draft ;-)

> > One point I noticed is that the new draft supports the compression
> > of multiple IP headers. Is this something that's particularly useful
> > for UDP-Lite (as compared with vanilla UDP), or just a feature that
> > would be good to have in general?
> 
> Something good to have in general.

In this case, would it be worth thinking about some other features that
are good to have in general? For the ROHC-TCP work we've developed a
number of enhancements (e.g. context replication) that are equally
applicable to other protocols such as UDP-Lite. If we're taking the
opportunity to improve the profile relative to UDP then these techniques
might be worth considering.

Regards,

Richard