[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: TO COMPRESS OR NOT TO CMPRS (please reply)
>>>>> "Dennis" == Dennis Glatting <dennis.glatting@plaintalk.bellevue.wa.us> writes:
Dennis> The yes-compress/no-compression discussion is akin to
Dennis> comparing Pepsi and Coke. Let's put a framework in place
Dennis> and make it optional and negotiated. Let empirical data
Dennis> determine its usefulness.
As long as it is negotiated, I see no reason why one needs
a flag to indicate compression. One simply negotiates two SPIs. One
SPI is compressed, the other is not. If the data doesn't compress (or
is too short to even bother trying: a TCP ACK, or telnet keystroke
data) then you use the SPI that didn't have compression negotiated.
My reading of the literature on high performance (parallelizing)
networking says that the sooner you can categorize the packets the
better you do. For TCP/UDP this means sorting by port number and
*then* worrying those other things like options, fragments, etc..
For IPsec, the SPI is what I'd sort by.
] Temporarily located in balmy Helsinki, Finland | one quark [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON | two quark [
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ | red q blue q[
] panic("Just another NetBSD/notebook using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [
Follow-Ups:
References: