rohc team mailing list archive

[Didier Barvaux <didier@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

> These are my questions:
>  
> ¿Is it correct to send the feedback in a dedicated UDP packet?

Yes, it is. It is called a "Dedicated feedback channel" or
"Interspersed feedback" in RFC 3759.

It is also correct to send it along with a compressed packet on the
reverse path. It is called "Piggybacked feedback" in RFC 3759.

RFC 3759: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3759


> ¿What is the objective of rcvd_feedback? I mean, if I send the
> feedback information in separate packets, I can identify it as
> feedback.

If you use a dedicated way for the transmission of feedback (ie.
"Dedicated feedback channel"), there is no possible confusion with ROHC
data, so rcvd_feedback is useless.

If you transmit the feedback data in the same channel as ROHC packets,
then you cannot identify them easily from ROHC packets. It is even
impossible if piggybacking is used. So, you use the rohc_decompress3()
function and get the feedback data.


> ¿Is it better to piggyback the feedback in compressed packets?

It entirely depends on whether you got a dedicated feedback channel or
not, and maybe the performance (compression wise) of it wrt
piggybacking :)


Regards,
Didier

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature