rohc team mailing list archive

[Didier Barvaux <question264189@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #264189 on rohc changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/rohc/+question/264189

    Status: Open => Answered

Didier Barvaux proposed the following answer:
Hi,

I forgot to tell you about the packets thrown away. In RFC 3095, the very end of the §5.3.2.2.5 entitled "Repair of incorrect SN updates" reads:
   The purpose of this algorithm is to repair the context.  If the
   header generated in d. passes the CRC test, the references are
   updated according to f., but two more headers MUST also be
   successfully decompressed before the repair is deemed successful.  Of
   the three successful headers, the first two SHOULD be discarded and
   only the third delivered to upper layers.  If decompression of any of
   the three headers fails, the decompressor MUST discard that header
   and the previously generated headers, and act according to rules a)
   through c) of section 5.3.2.2.3.

So, the behaviour that you detected in the logs is the expected one. It
helps the decompressor to be confident in the repair that it performed.

Thank you for the feedback on the patch, I'll integrate for the next
bugfix release 1.7.1.

Regards,
Didier

-- 
You received this question notification because you are a member of ROHC
Team, which is an answer contact for rohc.