Subject: [Tsvwg] Removing SCTP header compression from the ROHC charter

From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 16:38:03 +0100

ROHCers (cc sigtran & tsvwg),

The current ROHC WG charter has SCTP header compression listed as
one of our work items.  When this item was added, activity within
the ROHC WG was high, and the addition was made as a prediction of
future expectations rather than an outcome of well justified
immediate requirements.

Trying to fulfill this work item during the last year, we have
repeatedly asked for contributions to SCTP header compression, but
we have not received a single response.

Given that this work item was originally added without immediate
market pull, and considering the lack of current interest in doing
the work (or even having it done at all), we intend to remove SCTP
header compression from the ROHC WG charter.  To keep it in the
charter, justifications for developing SCTP header compression now
would have to be presented, as well as industry support and
commitments for doing the actual work.

Barring further input, we will send a request to the ADs by Jan 24,
so please reply before this date if you believe SCTP header
compression should be on the agenda now.

/Lars-Erik & Carsten
_______________________________________________
tsvwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg

---

From: "Price, Richard" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:13:01 -0000

> we have not received a single response.

We published a first version of an SCTP compression profile in
draft-west-sctp-epic-00.txt. This draft is based on the formal header
compression notation (see draft-ietf-rohc-formal-notation-00.txt),
so we intend to update the SCTP draft once the formal notation draft
is finalised.

> commitments for doing the actual work.

This work item is important because, unlike for TCP, there is currently
no published scheme for SCTP compression. This will hinder the
deployment of SCTP, particularly in the mobile environment.

Regarding the industry support, we're currently working on SCTP
compression at the moment in the form of the notation draft. Once this
work is done we'll publish an updated version of our SCTP profile.

> compression should be on the agenda now.

I believe that SCTP compression should remain on the ROHC charter.

Regards,

Richard