Subject: [rohc] TCP Implementation

From: Kavitha KR <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 13:53:32 +0530

Hi ROHC'ers,

This question is from an implementation perspective. 
ROHC TCP seems more towards RoHCv2 rather than RFC3095. 
I request the forum's general opinion and advice for for TCP 
implementation 
into a system where some profiles of RFC3095 is already implemented.

Thanks, 
Kavitha

______________________________________________________________________

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

---

From: "Sarkar, Biplab" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2006 14:23:41 +0530

Kavitha,

I feel, as far as, the implementation is concerned, one should also try
to keep things aligned to the way the ROHC documents are evolving. So we
can have the idea/concepts from the "rohc-framework" draft/RFC as a
guide for making some "common" profile-independent library. Then we
better have some separate "plug-able" modules for each profile.  This
way it would make things very easy to align the rohc stack to any new
future profiles. So, as ROHC TCP came a bit late, it is more close to
ROHCv2 then RFC3095. From the software design perspective, some
plug-able modules would make things nice.

Thanks

Biplab

________________________________

From: Kavitha KR [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 1:54 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [rohc] TCP Implementation

Hi ROHC'ers, 

Thanks, 
Kavitha