[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: the COMPRESSION discussion

To: "C. Harald Koch" <chk@utcc.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: the COMPRESSION discussion
From: Karl Fox <karl@Ascend.COM>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 1997 08:28:44 -0800
Cc: Ran Atkinson <rja@inet.org>, ipsec@tis.com
In-Reply-To: <97Mar20.105913est.11651@elgreco.rnd.border.com>
Organization: Ascend Communications
References: <3.0.1.32.19970319110315.00b4ad70@dilbert.is.chrysler.com><Chameleon.858823442.rja@c8-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com><97Mar20.105913est.11651@elgreco.rnd.border.com>
Reply-To: Karl Fox <karl@Ascend.COM>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

C. Harald Koch writes:
> Compression is extremely difficult to standardize, due to the number of
> patents on compression algorithms. Witness the PPP WG, which ran around and
> around on the discussion of compression for years,

This is true.

> and where there is *still* no useful interoperable compression.

This is not true.  CCP is standardized, and at least two compression
methods are in widespread use, being available on the majority of all
PPP-speaking devices.
-- 
Karl Fox, servant of God, employee of Ascend Communications
3518 Riverside Drive, Suite 101, Columbus, Ohio 43221   +1 614 326 6841

References:

Re: Closing out the COMPRESSION discussion

From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm3@chrysler.com>

Re: the COMPRESSION discussion

From: Ran Atkinson <rja@inet.org>

Re: the COMPRESSION discussion

From: "C. Harald Koch" <chk@utcc.utoronto.ca>

Prev by Date: RE: Closing out the COMPRESSION discussion
Next by Date: Re: inline keying
Prev by thread: Re: the COMPRESSION discussion
Next by thread: Re: the COMPRESSION discussion
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread