Subject: Re: [rohc] Liaison request from 3GPP2

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:22:06 -0400

Thanks all for the followup. It has been useful.
 
Note that 3GPP2 wants to make use of the new profile that deals with
packet reordering. Thus, it wants an updated profile published (as an
RFC) that it can formally reference as part of its standard.

What they want to know, is what is a reasonable/realistic target date
for that work to be finished (i.e., through the IETF and approved  by
the IESG)?

So, for the profiles document:

1) it seems that since -00 does not even exist, we are talking several
   more months (or maybe a year???) before the document is
   finished. Can the WG provide a target timeline for when that work
   might complete?

2) To help with a timeline, is there a sense for how much work is
   needed to get an updated profiles document? I.e., is it already
   generally understood what is needed and thus is the -00 draft
   likely to be mostly complete? Or, is the -00 document a first cut,
   and is it expected that more and more will need to be added as
   people start to review it?

3) Alternatively (and this may sound naive), is another possible
   avenue to have a separte (short and focused) document that aims to
   address just the reordering profile, in order to get that done
   relatively quickly?

Again, my goal is to have a realistic timeline for when this work will
get completed and approved by the IESG, so 3GPP2 can plan accordingly.

Thomas   

_______________________________________________
Rohc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc

---

From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 16:43:01 +0200

Thomas,

I am currently working with a charter and milestones update for ROHC, so 
I hope to have reasonable timeline estimates within one week (absolutely 
not more than two weeks). The technical content of the new profiles is 
pretty well known and agreed, but we really want to make a better 
specification this time (RFC 3095 was a mess to understand), and that 
will of course require some cycles. Doing an additional profile set only 
to improve reordering tolerance is not an alternative, we do not want to 
deliver another specification based on 3095. Also, I expect the 
reordering tolerance part to be the trickiest (technically) work of the 
new profile set.

So, during the next 1-2 weeks, expect to see both the -00 profiles draft 
and an update of the ROHC charter (at least a stable proposal, if not 
yet approved).

Rgds,
/Lars-Erik

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Thomas Narten" <[email-masked]>
To: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (LU/EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; "Ghyslain Pelletier (LU/EAB)" 
<[email-masked]>; "AC Mahendran" 
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: [rohc] Liaison request from 3GPP2