Subject: RE: [rohc] ROHC-TCP, ack number compression

From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (LU/EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 13:28:46 +0100

Kristofer,

You've given an excellent summary of this issue.

> I could consider option b), but as I stated, I cannot really 
> estimate the gain, so possibly a) is good enough.

I agree with you that option b) sound like a workable approach,
but I am also unsure about the potential gain. We could of
course include it in any case, as it does not hurt anything
but introducing an additional control parameter that might not
be used. However, personally I would go for the simplest
possible approach a), as I do not see the big gain from adding
an additional mechanism, and I think we should aim at finalizing
ROHC-TCP THIS YEAR (yes, 2004).

If others promote b), I'll accept that, as long as we decide and
move on.

/L-E

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