[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: IPCOMP and IPSEC
>>>>> "Avram" == Avram Shacham <shacham@cisco.com> writes:
Avram> At 12:01 PM 6/4/98 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>> TCPng needs to add intelligent compression (that is interact with
>> the application). There is could have history.
Avram> In previous discussions of compression at level 4, several
Avram> people correctly pointed that TCP-compression may reduce the
Avram> number of IP packets while IP compression can only reduce the
Avram> size of each packet. Fewer IP packets may enhance performance
Avram> even more than utilizing compression history.
That's a very good point. Certainly sending the same number of bytes
in a smaller number of packets is always a win.
Avram> But - and this may be a BIG implementation obstacle - the
Avram> current compression algorithms require ~16KB of compression
Avram> and decompression context for _each_ connection. In other
Avram> words, 16KB per socket...
That's only a few millicents per socket.
Avram> Also, UDP is still a useful L4 protocol and no stateful
Avram> compression is possible here either.
True, but for UDP packets that are larger than the MTU, the same
IP packet reduction benefit applies.
References: