Network Working Group Peter Kremer, Ericsson INTERNET-DRAFT Lars-Erik Jonsson, Ericsson Expires: August 2003 February 28, 2003 ROHC Implementer's Guide Status of this memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or cite them other than as "work in progress". The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/lid-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html This document is a submission of the IETF ROHC WG. Comments should be directed to the ROHC WG mailing list, rohc@ietf.org. Abstract This document describes common misinterpretations and some ambiguous points of ROHC [RFC 3095], which defines the framework and four profiles of a robust and efficient header compression scheme. These points have been identified by the members of the ROHC working group during different interoperability test events. Kremer, Jonsson [Page 1] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 Table of Contents 1. Introduction....................................................2 2. CRC Calculation.................................................3 3. Enhanced mode transition procedures.............................3 3.1. Modified transition logic for enhanced transitions............3 3.2. Transition from Reliable to Optimistic mode...................4 3.3. Transition to Unidirectional mode.............................5 4. Other protocol clarifications...................................5 4.1. Padding octet in CRC..........................................5 4.2. Timestamp encoding considerations.............................5 4.2.1. Encoding of TS values.......................................5 4.2.2. Interpretation intervals for TS encoding....................5 4.2.3. Recalculating TS_OFFSET.....................................6 4.3. List compression issues.......................................6 4.3.1. Generic extension header list...............................6 4.3.2. CSRC list items in RTP dynamic chain........................6 4.3.3. RTP dynamic chain...........................................7 4.3.4. CSRC list in UO-1-ID packets................................7 4.3.5. Bit masks in list compression...............................7 4.4. Meaning of NBO................................................8 4.5. Implicit updates..............................................8 4.6. IP-ID.........................................................8 4.7. Extension-3 in UO-1-ID packets................................8 4.8. Extension-3 in UOR-2* packets.................................9 4.9. Multiple SN options in one feedback packet....................9 4.10. Packet decoding during mode transition.......................9 4.11. How to respond to lost feedback links?.......................9 4.12. What does "presumed zero if absent" mean on page 88?........10 4.13. UOR-2 in profile 2 (UDP)....................................10 5. ROHC negotiation clarifications................................10 6. PROFILES suboption in ROHC-over-PPP............................11 7. Test Configuration.............................................11 8. Security considerations........................................12 9. Acknowledgment.................................................12 10. References....................................................12 11. Authors' Addresses............................................12 Appendix A. Sample CRC algorithm..................................13 1. Introduction ROHC [RFC 3095] addresses a robust and efficient header compression algorithm and as a such its description is long and complex. During the implementation and the interoperability tests of the algorithm some unclear areas have been identified. This document tries to collect and clarify these points. Note that all section and chapter Kremer, Jonsson [Page 2] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 references in this document refer to [RFC-3095], if not stated otherwise. 2. CRC Calculation ROHC uses CRC checksum in order to provide some protection against bit errors. CRC is used in the segmentation protocol and in the compressed packets, as well. Section 5.2.5.2 describes the segmentation protocol and refers to [RFC 1662], which describes a well-defined CRC algorithm for 32 bit checksums. Although, Section 5.9 only defines the polynomials for 3, 7 and 8-bit long checksum, the same algorithm can be used in these cases as well. A PERL implementation of the algorithm (written by Carsten Bormann) can be found in Appendix A. 3. Enhanced mode transition procedures To reduce transmission overhead and computational complexity (including CRC calculation) associated with feedback packets sent for each decompressed packet during mode transition, a decompressor can be implemented with slightly modified mode transition procedures, compared to those defined in [RFC3095]. These modifications affect transitions to Optimistic and Unidirectional modes of operation, i.e. the transitions described in sections 5.6.5 and 5.6.6 of [RFC3095], and make those transition diagrams more consistent with the diagram describing the transition to R-mode. However, the differences between the original diagrams of [RFC3095] were motivated by robustness concerns for mode transitions to Optimistic and Unidirectional modes. To avoid deadlock situations in mode transitions, these aspects must be addressed also when a decompressor implements the enhanced transition procedures, and that is done by following a slightly modified definition of the decompressor transition states. All aspects related to implementation of the enhanced transition procedures are described in subsequent chapters. Note that these modified operations should be seen only as an improved decompressor implementation, since interoperability is not at all affected. A decompressor implemented according to the optimized procedures would be able to interoperate with an RFC3095 compressor, as well as a decompressor implemented according to the procedures described in RFC3095 would do. 3.1. Modified transition logic for enhanced transitions The intent with these enhanced transition procedures is to allow the decompressor to stop sending feedback packets for all packets Kremer, Jonsson [Page 3] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 decompressed during the second half of the transition procedure, i.e. after an appropriate IR/IR-DYN/UOR-2 packet has been received from the compressor. In the transition diagrams, sections 3.2 and 3.3 below, this is realized by allowing the decompressor transition parameter (D_TRANS) to be set to P (Pending) at that stage. However, as mentioned above, there are robustness concerns related to this optimization, and to avoid deadlock situations with never completed transitions as a result of feedback losses, the decompressor must continue to send feedback at least periodically, also when in Pending transition state. That would be the equivalence of enhancing the D_TRANS parameter definition in section 5.6.1 of [RFC3095], to include a definition of Pending state operation. - D_TRANS: Possible values for the D_TRANS parameter are (I)NITIATED, (P)ENDING and (D)ONE. D_TRANS MUST be initialized to D, and a mode transition can be initiated only when D_TRANS is D. While D_TRANS is I, the decompressor sends a NACK or ACK carrying a CRC option for each packet received. When D_TRANS is set to P, the decompressor do not have to send a NACK or ACK for each packet received, but it MUST continue to send feedback on a regular basis, and all feedback packets sent MUST include the CRC option. This ensures that all mode transitions will be completed also in case of feedback losses. 3.2. Transition from Reliable to Optimistic mode The enhanced procedure for transition from Reliable to Optimistic mode is shown below: Compressor Decompressor ---------------------------------------------- | | | ACK(O)/NACK(O) +-<-<-<-| D_TRANS = I | +-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-+ | C_TRANS = P |-<-<-<-+ | C_MODE = O | | |->->->-+ IR/IR-DYN/UOR-2(SN,O) | | +->->->->->->->-+ | |->-.. +->->->-| D_TRANS = P |->-.. | D_MODE = O | ACK(SN,O) +-<-<-<-| | +-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-+ | C_TRANS = D |-<-<-<-+ | | | |->->->-+ UO-0, UO-1* | | +->->->->->->->-+ | | +->->->-| D_TRANS = D | | Kremer, Jonsson [Page 4] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 3.3. Transition to Unidirectional mode The enhanced procedure for transition to Unidirectional mode is shown on the following figure: Compressor Decompressor ---------------------------------------------- | | | ACK(U)/NACK(U) +-<-<-<-| D_TRANS = I | +-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-+ | C_TRANS = P |-<-<-<-+ | C_MODE = U | | |->->->-+ IR/IR-DYN/UOR-2(SN,U) | | +->->->->->->->-+ | |->-.. +->->->-| D_TRANS = P |->-.. | | ACK(SN,U) +-<-<-<-| | +-<-<-<-<-<-<-<-+ | C_TRANS = D |-<-<-<-+ | | | |->->->-+ UO-0, UO-1* | | +->->->->->->->-+ | | +->->->-| D_TRANS = D | | D_MODE= U 4. Other protocol clarifications 4.1. Padding octet in CRC According to Section 5.9.1, in case of IR and IR-DYN packets the CRC "is calculated over the entire IR or IR-DYN packet, excluding Payload and including CID or Add-CID octet". Padding isn't meant to be meaningful part of a packet and not included in CRC calculation. As a result, CRC doesn't cover the Add-CID octet for CID 0, either. 4.2. Timestamp encoding considerations 4.2.1. Encoding of TS values RTP Timestamp values (TS) are always encoded using W-LSB encoding, both when sent scaled and when sent unscaled. For TS values sent in Extension 3, W-LSB encoded values are sent using the self-describing variable-length format (section 4.5.6), and this applies to both scaled and unscaled values. 4.2.2. Interpretation intervals for TS encoding Section 4.5.4 defines the interpretation interval, p, for timer-based compression of the RTP timestamp. However, Section 5.7 defines a different interpretation interval, which is defined as the Kremer, Jonsson [Page 5] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 interpretation interval to use for all TS values. It is thus unclear which p-value to use, at least for timer-based compression. The way this should be interpreted is that the p-value differs depending on whether timer-based compression is enabled or not. For timer-based compression, the interpretation interval of section 4.5.4, p = 2^(k-1) - 1, is used for TS. Otherwise, the interval of section 5.7, p = 2^(k-2) - 1, is used for TS with regular W-LSB encoding. Since two different p-values are used, the compressor must take this into account during the process of enabling timer-based compression. Before timer-based compression can be used, the decompressor will have to inform the compressor (on a per-channel basis) about its clock resolution, and the compressor has to send (on a per-context basis) a non-zero TIME_STRIDE to the decompressor. When the compressor is confident that the decompressor has received the TIME_STRIDE value, it can switch to timer-based compression. During this transition from window-based compression to timer-based compression, it is necessary that the compressor keeps k large enough to cover both interpretation intervals. 4.2.3. Recalculating TS_OFFSET TS can be sent unscaled if the TS value change does not match the established TS_STRIDE, but the TS_STRIDE might still stay unchanged. To ensure correct decompression of subsequent packets, the decompressor should therefore always recalculate the RTP TS modulo, TS_OFFSET, when a packet with an unscaled TS value is received. 4.3. List compression issues 4.3.1. Generic extension header list Section 5.7.7.4 defines the static and dynamic parts of the IPv4 header. This section indicates a 'Generic extension header list' field in the dynamic chain, which has a variable length. The detailed description of this field can be found in Section 5.8.6.1. The generic extension header list starts with an octet that is always present, so its length is one octet, at least. If the 'GP' bit in the first octet is set to 1 then the length of the list is two octets, even if the list is empty. 4.3.2. CSRC list items in RTP dynamic chain Section 5.7.7.6 defines the static and dynamic parts of the RTP header. This section indicates a 'Generic CSRC list' field in the dynamic chain, which has a variable length. This field uses the same Kremer, Jonsson [Page 6] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 encoding rules as the 'Generic extension header list' in the IPv4 header, so the same rules apply to its length. 4.3.3. RTP dynamic chain Section 5.7.7.6 defines the static and dynamic parts of the RTP header. In the dynamic part, a 'CC' field indicates the number of CSRC items present in the 'Generic CSRC list'. It should be noted that when the value of this CC field is equal to zero, there is no Generic CSRC list present in the dynamic chain, i.e. the field comment should have said "variable length, present if CC > 0". A 'CC' field can also be found within the 'Generic CSRC list' (when present), and these fields would then have the same meaning. In order to decode a compressed packet correctly it's necessary to know the 'CC' value because it has serious impact on the packet's length. In normal case, the values of the fields are equal. Proposed behavior if the values are different: Both fields are within the RTP dynamic part but only the second 'CC' field resides inside the 'Generic CSRC list' together with the XI items. Since the 'CC' value determines the number of XI items in the CSRC list and isn't used otherwise, the first CC field should be ignored and only the second field (inside the CSRC list) should be used for incoming packets. For outgoing packets both fields should be set to the same value. 4.3.4. CSRC list in UO-1-ID packets This section describes the situation when a UO-1-ID packet carries a CSRC list. Compressed CSRC lists are encoded using Encoding Type 0 (section 5.7.5 and 5.8.6.1) and every list may have a unique identifier (gen_id). The identifier is present in U/O-mode when the compressor decides that it may use this list as a future reference. On one hand, the decompressor shouldn't save the list because UO-1-ID packets doesn't update the context. On the other hand, the decompressor updates its translation table whenever an (Index, item) pair is received (section 5.8.1). The decompressor must be able to handle such a packet, thus it has to behave as described in the latter case. According to section 5.8.1.2, the compressor must increment Counter by 1. 4.3.5. Bit masks in list compression A 7-bit or 15-bit mask may be used in the insertion and/or removal schemes for compressed lists. It should be noted that even if a list has more than 7 items, a 7-bit mask can be used as long as changes are only applied in the first part of the reference list, and all items with an index not covered by the 7-bit mask are then kept unchanged. Kremer, Jonsson [Page 7] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 4.4. Meaning of NBO In general, an unset flag indicates the normal operation and a set flag indicates unusual behavior. However, in IPv4 dynamic part (Section 5.7.7.4), if the 'NBO' bit is set, it means that network byte order is used. 4.5. Implicit updates If an updating packet (e.g. R-0-CRC or UO-0) contains information about a specific field X (compressed RTP sequence number, typically), then X is updated according to the content of that packet. But this packet implicitly updates all other inferred fields (i.e. RTP timestamp) according to the current mode and the appropriate mapping function of the updated and the inferred fields. An updating packet thus updates the reference values of all header fields, either explicitly or implicitly, with an exception for the UO-1-ID packet, which only updates TS, SN and IP-ID (see 5.7.3). In UO-mode, all packets are updating packets, while in R-mode all packets with a CRC are updating packets. For example, a UO-0 packet contains the compressed RTP sequence number (SN). Such a packet also updates RTP timestamp and IPv4 ID, implicitly. 4.6. IP-ID According to Section 5.7 IP-ID means the compressed value of the IPv4 header's 'Identification' field. Type 0, 1 and 2 packets contain the compressed value (IP-ID), however IR packets with dynamic chain and IR-DYN packets transmit the original, uncompressed value. This is because the dynamic part of the IPv4 header (Section 5.7.7.4) contains the 'Identification' field instead of the IP-ID. 4.7. Extension-3 in UO-1-ID packets Extension-3 is applied to give values and indicate changes to fields other than SN, TS and IP-ID in IP header(s) and RTP header. In case of UO-1-ID packets, it should be noted that values provided in extensions do not update the context, with an exception for SN, TS and IP-ID fields, which always update the context (Section 5.7.3.). It should also be noted that a UO-1-ID packet with Extension 3 must never be sent with RND flags that changes the packet interpretation, i.e. that would violate the base condition for UO-1-ID (at least one RND value must be 0). Besides, usage of Extension-3 in UO-1-ID can be useful to compress a transient change in a packet stream. For example, if a field's value changes in the current packet but in the next packet it returns to its regular behavior. E.g. changes in TTL. Kremer, Jonsson [Page 8] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 4.8. Extension-3 in UOR-2* packets If Extension-3 is used in a UOR-2* packet then the information of the extension updates the context (Section 5.7.4). Some flags of the IP header in the extension (e.g. NBO or RND) can change the interpretation of fields in UOR-2* packets. In these cases, when a flag changes in Extension-3, a decompressor should re-parse the UOR- 2* packet. 4.9. Multiple SN options in one feedback packet The length of the sequence number field in the original ESP header is 32 bits. A decompressor can't send back all the 32 bits in a feedback packet unless it uses multiple SN options in one feedback packet. Section 5.7.6.1 declares that a FEEDABCK-2 packet can contain variable number of feedback options and the options can appear in any order. A compressor - that wants to be conform to the specification - should be able to process multiple SN options in one feedback packet. 4.10. Packet decoding during mode transition Each ROHC profile defines its own set of packet formats, and also its own feedback packets. The use of various operational modes is also defined by each specific profile. A decompressor can therefore not initiate a mode transfer request before at least one packet of a new context has been correctly decompressed, establishing the context based on one specific profile (as specified in IR packets). First then the context has been established, the decompressor knows the profile used, which modes are defined by that profile, and the feedback packet formats available. If the transition procedures in sections 5.6.5 and 5.6.6 of [RFC3095] are followed (and not the enhanced procedures described in section 3 of this document), it is important to note that type 0 or type 1 packets may be received by the decompressor during the first half of the transition procedure, and these packets must not mistakenly be interpreted as the packets sent by the compressor to indicate completed transition. The decompressor side must therefore keep track of the transition status, e.g. with an additional parameter. If the enhanced transition procedures described in section 3 of this document are used, the D_TRANS parameter can serve this purpose since its definition and usage is slightly modified. 4.11. How to respond to lost feedback links? One potential issue that might have to be considered, depending on link technology, is whether feedback links might get lost, and in such cases how this is handled. When the compressor is notified that Kremer, Jonsson [Page 9] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 the feedback channel is down, the compressor must be able to handle it by restarting compression with creating a new context. Creating a new context also implies to use a new CID value. Generally, feedback links are not expected to disappear when once present, but it should be noted that this might be the case for certain link technologies. 4.12. What does "presumed zero if absent" mean on page 88? On page 88, RFC 3095 says that R-P contains the absolute value of RTP Padding bit and it's presumed zero if absent. It could be absent from RTP header flags and fields, from the extension type 3 or from the ROHC packet. It's been agreed that the RTP padding bit is presumed zero if absent from the RTP header flags. 4.13. UOR-2 in profile 2 (UDP) One single new format is defined for UOR-2 in profile 2, which replaces all three (UOR-2, UOR-2-ID, UOR-2-TS) formats from profile 1. The same UOR-2 format is thus used independent of if there are IP headers with a corresponding RND=1 or not. 5. ROHC negotiation clarifications Section 4.1 states that the link layer must provide means to negotiate e.g. the channel parameters listed in section 5.1.1. One of these parameters is the PROFILES parameter, which is said to be a set of non-negative integers where each integer indicates a profile supported by the decompressor. This can be interpreted as if it is sufficient to have a mechanism to announce profile support from decompressor to compressor. However, things are a little bit more complicated than that. Each profile is identified by a 16-bit value, where the 8 LSB bits indicate the actual profile, and the 8 MSB bits indicate the variant of that profile (see chapter 8). In the ROHC headers sent over the link, the profile used is identified only with the 8 LSB bits, which means that the compressor and decompressor must have agreed on which variant to use for each profile. This can be done in various ways, but the negotiation protocol must provide means to do it. In conclusion, the negotiation protocol must be able to communicate to the compressor the set of profiles supported by the decompressor, and when multiple variants of the same profile are available, also provide means for the decompressor to know which variant will be used by the compressor. This basically means that the PROFILES set after negotiation must not include more than one variant of the same profile. Kremer, Jonsson [Page 10] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 6. PROFILES suboption in ROHC-over-PPP The logical union of suboptions for IPCP and IPV6CP negotiations, as specified by ROHC over PPP [RFC-3241], can not be used for the PROFILES suboption, as the whole union would then have to be considered within each of the two IPCP negotiations, to avoid getting an ambiguous profile set. An implementation of RFC 3241 must therefore make sure the same profile set is negotiated for both IPv4 and IPv6 (IPCP and IPV6CP). 7. Test Configuration ROHC is used to compress IP/UDP/RTP, IP/UDP and IP/ESP headers, thus every ROHC implementation has an interface that can send and receive IP packets (i.e. Ethernet). On the other hand, there must be an interface (a serial link for example) or other means of transport (an IP/UDP flow), which can transmit ROHC packets. Having these two interfaces several configurations can be set up. The figure below shows sample configurations that can be used for testing a ROHC implementation: IP/UDP/RTP +------------+ ROHC +--------------+ IP/UDP/RTP packets | ROHC | packets | ROHC | packets ---------->| Compressor |-----> ----->| Decompressor |----------> +------------+ +--------------+ Unfortunately, comparing the IP/UDP/RTP packets at the endpoints can only show whether the reconstructed stream differs from the original or not. In order to identify the place of the error more detailed tests are needed. The next figure shows another possible scenario: IP/UDP/RTP +------------+ ROHC IP/UDP/RTP +--------------+ ROHC packets | ROHC | packets packets | ROHC | packets +----->| Compressor |----->+ +<-----| Decompressor |<-----+ | +------------+ | | +--------------+ | | | | | | +------------+ | | +------------+ | | | Test | | | | Test | | +<-----| Equipment |<-----+ +------>| Equipment |------>+ +------------+ +------------+ In the first case, the test equipment generates the RTP stream and also acts as a ROHC decompressor. The tester must recognize if the original RTP stream was compressed in a bad way and gives an alarm. In the second case, it is the test equipment that sends the compressed ROHC packets and the Decompressor reconstructs the RTP stream. Since the tester knows the ROHC packets and the reconstructed RTP stream it can detect if the Decompressor makes a mistake. Kremer, Jonsson [Page 11] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 8. Security considerations This document provides a number of clarifications to [RFC-3095], but it does not make any changes or additions to the protocol. As a consequence, the security considerations of [RFC-3095] apply without additions. 9. Acknowledgment The authors would like thank Vicknesan Ayadurai, Carsten Bormann, Zhigang Liu, Abigail Surtees and Mark West for their contributions and comments. 10. References [RFC-3095] C. Bormann, Editor, "RObust Header Compression (ROHC)", RFC 3095, July 2001. [RFC-3241] C. Bormann, "Robust Header Compression (ROHC) over PPP", RFC 3241, April 2002. [RFC-1662] W. Simpson, Editor, "PPP in HDLC-like Framing", RFC 1662, July 1994. 11. Authors' Addresses Peter Kremer Conformance and Software Test Laboratory Ericsson Hungary H-1300 Bp. 3., P.O. Box 107, HUNGARY Phone: +36-1-437-7033 Fax: +36-1-437-7767 Email: Peter.Kremer@ericsson.com Lars-Erik Jonsson Ericsson AB Box 920 SE-971 28 Lulea, Sweden Phone: +46 920 20 21 07 Fax: +46 920 20 20 99 EMail: lars-erik.jonsson@ericsson.com Kremer, Jonsson [Page 12] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 Appendix A. Sample CRC algorithm #!/usr/bin/perl -w use strict; #================================= # # ROHC CRC demo - Carsten Bormann cabo@tzi.org 2001-08-02 # # This little demo shows the three types of CRC in use in RFC 3095, # the robust header compression standard. Type your data in # hexadecimal form and the press Control+D. # #--------------------------------- # # utility # sub dump_bytes($) { my $x = shift; my $i; for ($i = 0; $i < length($x); ) { printf("%02x ", ord(substr($x, $i, 1))); printf("\n") if (++$i % 16 == 0); } printf("\n") if ($i % 16 != 0); } #--------------------------------- # # The CRC calculation algorithm. # sub do_crc($$$) { my $nbits = shift; my $poly = shift; my $string = shift; my $crc = ($nbits == 32 ? 0xffffffff : (1 << $nbits) - 1); for (my $i = 0; $i < length($string); ++$i) { my $byte = ord(substr($string, $i, 1)); for( my $b = 0; $b < 8; $b++ ) { if (($crc & 1) ^ ($byte & 1)) { $crc >>= 1; $crc ^= $poly; } else { $crc >>= 1; } $byte >>= 1; } } printf "%2d bits, ", $nbits; printf "CRC: %02x\n", $crc; } Kremer, Jonsson [Page 13] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 #--------------------------------- # # Test harness # $/ = undef; $_ = <>; # read until EOF my $string = ""; # extract all that looks hex: s/([0-9a-fA-F][0-9a-fA-F])/$string .= chr(hex($1)), ""/eg; dump_bytes($string); #--------------------------------- # # 32-bit segmentation CRC # Note that the text implies this is complemented like for PPP # (this differs from 8, 7, and 3-bit CRC) # # C(x) = x^0 + x^1 + x^2 + x^4 + x^5 + x^7 + x^8 + x^10 + # x^11 + x^12 + x^16 + x^22 + x^23 + x^26 + x^32 # do_crc(32, 0xedb88320, $string); #--------------------------------- # # 8-bit IR/IR-DYN CRC # # C(x) = x^0 + x^1 + x^2 + x^8 # do_crc(8, 0xe0, $string); #--------------------------------- # # 7-bit FO/SO CRC # # C(x) = x^0 + x^1 + x^2 + x^3 + x^6 + x^7 # do_crc(7, 0x79, $string); #--------------------------------- # # 3-bit FO/SO CRC # # C(x) = x^0 + x^1 + x^3 # do_crc(3, 0x6, $string); Kremer, Jonsson [Page 14] INTERNET-DRAFT ROHC Implementer's Guide February 28, 2003 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. This Internet-Draft expires August 28, 2003. Kremer, Jonsson [Page 15]