Subject: RE: [rohc] Lessons learned from 5 years of 3095 experience

From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (LU/EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:30:04 +0200

Aniruddha and others,

I've updated appendix B based on the previous proposal, and 
incorporated the suggestions from Aniruddha. I added B.5 to
discuss the implementation-related texts, as also suggested
by Aniruddha. Please review it when the draft gets posted.

The only issue I do not know how to handle is the one about
static/dynamic CRC split (see below). Can we get some more
concrete arguments here, or at least more opinions?
Implementer's, please share your thoughts on this!

BR
/L-E

> > 4. The split of CRC into static and dynamic has been difficult
> > to implement. It may have saved some cpu cycles but I am not
> > sure if it has been worth the complexity. A simple
> > implementation can be optimized and cpu cycles saved.
> 
> I have also thought about this, but I have no idea how to get
> a clear opinion on whether the static/dynamic separation is a
> good or a bad thing. How can we quantify the cost versus gain?
> Sure I could buy the argument that removing this "feature"
> would simplify things and therefore be worth it, but I had
> preferred to have more concrete arguments.

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