RFC 3843 (rfc3843) - Page 2 of 16
RObust Header Compression (ROHC): A Compression Profile for IP
Alternative Format: Original Text Document
RFC 3843 A ROHC Profile for IP June 2004
Appendix A. Detailed Procedures for Canceling Mode Transitions. . 12
A.1. Transition from Optimistic to Reliable Mode. . . . . . . 12
A.2. Transition from Unidirectional to Reliable Mode. . . . . 13
A.3. Transition from Reliable to Optimistic Mode. . . . . . . 13
A.4. Transition Back to Unidirectional Mode . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction
The original RObust Header Compression (ROHC) RFC [RFC-3095] defines
a framework for header compression, along with compression protocols
(profiles) for IP/UDP/RTP, IP/ESP (Encapsulating Security Payload),
IP/UDP, and also a profile for uncompressed packet streams. The
profile for uncompressed data was defined to provide a means to
encapsulate all traffic over a link within ROHC packets. Through
this profile, the lower layers do not have to provide multiplexing
for different packet types, but instead ROHC can handle any packet
stream, even if compression profiles for all kinds of packet streams
have not yet been defined or implemented over the link.
Although the profile without compression is simple and can tunnel
arbitrary packets, it has of course a major weakness in that it does
not compress the headers at all. When considering that normally all
packets are expected to be IP [RFC-791, RFC-2460] packets, and that
the IP header often represents a major part of the total header, a
useful alternative to no compression would for most packets be
compression of the IP header only. Unfortunately, such a profile was
not defined in [RFC-3095], and this has thus been identified as an
important missing piece in the ROHC toolbox.
This document addresses this missing compression support and defines
a ROHC compression profile for IP [RFC-791, RFC-2460] only, similar
to the IP/UDP profile defined by [RFC-3095], but simplified to
exclude UDP. Due to the similarities with the IP/UDP profile, the IP
compression profile is described based on the IP/UDP profile, mainly
covering differences. The most important differences are a different
way of terminating the static header chain, and the capability of
compressing IP header chains of arbitrary length.
2. Terminology
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC-2119].
Jonsson & Pelletier Standards Track