Network Working Group                                           J. Heath
Request for Comments: 3051                                     J. Border
Category: Informational                           Hughes Network Systems
                                                            January 2001


         IP Payload Compression Using ITU-T V.44 Packet Method

Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   This document describes a compression method based on the data
   compression algorithm described in International Telecommunication
   Union (ITU-T) Recommendation V.44.  Recommendation V.44 is a modem
   standard but Annex B, Clause B.1, of the recommendation describes the
   implementation of V.44 in packet networks (e.g., V.44 Packet Method).
   This document defines the application of V.44 Packet Method to the
   Internet Protocol (IP) Payload Compression Protocol (RFC 2393).  RFC
   2393 defines a method for applying lossless compression to the
   payload portion of IP datagrams.

   V.44 Packet Method is based upon the LZJH data compression algorithm.
   Throughout the remainder of this document the terms V.44 Packet
   Method and LZJH are synonymous.

Table of Contents

    1. Introduction...................................................2
       1.1 General....................................................2
       1.2 Background of LZJH Data Compression........................2
       1.3 Intellectual Property Rights...............................3
       1.4 Specification of Requirements..............................4
    2. Compression Process............................................4
       2.1 Encoder Dictionary.........................................4
       2.2 Encoder Output.............................................4
       2.3 Padding....................................................4
    3. Decompression Process..........................................5
       3.1 Compressed Datagram........................................5
       3.2 Original Uncompressed Datagram.............................5
    4. IPComp Association (IPCA) Parameters...........................5
       4.1 Transform ID...............................................5
       4.2 Security Association Attributes............................5
       4.3 Manual configuration.......................................5
       4.4 Minimum packet size threshold..............................6
       4.5 Compressibility test.......................................6
    5. Security Considerations........................................6
    6. IANA Considerations............................................6
    7. Acknowledgements...............................................6
    8. References.....................................................6
    9. Authors' Addresses.............................................7
   10. Full Copyright Statement.......................................8

1. Introduction

1.1 General

   This document specifies the application of LZJH data compression, a
   lossless data compression algorithm, to IP datagram payloads.  LZJH
   data compression is to be used in conjunction with the IP Payload
   Compression Protocol (IPComp) [RFC2393].  This document is written
   with the assumption that the reader has an understanding of the
   IPComp protocol.

1.2 Background of LZJH Data Compression

   LZJH is similar to the algorithm described in [LZ78] although it also
   has aspects which are similar to the algorithm described in [LZ77].
   As such, it provides the execution speed and low memory requirements
   of [LZ78] with compression ratios that are better than [LZ77].
   Originally developed for the satellite industry to compress IP
   datagrams independently, it is ideal for the IPComp application.  The
   LZJH algorithm was modified to compress a continuous stream of data
   for a modem environment and this modified version is the basis for

   Recommendation V.44.  LZJH is an adaptive, general purpose, lossless
   data compression algorithm.  It was selected by the ITU-T as the
   basis for Recommendation V.44 based on its performance across a wide
   variety of data types, particularly web HTML's, and based on its
   compression ratio characteristics, per MIP and memory utilized (as
   compared to other candidate algorithms).  Its encoder is extremely
   efficient and can encode a two character string with 3 bits the
   second time that string is encountered in the data.

   A typical [LZ78] compression algorithm, such as V.42bis, is not
   suitable for an IPComp application since it takes too long to build
   up its dictionary, resulting in poor compression ratios on IP
   datagrams that are compressed independently.  It also requires too
   many cycles to reset an [LZ78] dictionary between datagrams which
   adversely affects execution times.

   Similarly, a typical [LZ77] compression algorithm suffers in the
   IPComp application due to poor execution times.  Hash tables, that
   help improve execution times when compressing continuous data, may
   cause deterioration of execution times in an IPComp application since
   they must be reset to an initial state between each datagram.

   LZJH not only has superior execution times when encoding or decoding
   packet data, but the reset of the dictionary between IP datagrams is
   trivial.  The encoder requires only the initialization of a 256 word
   array and a handful of variables while the decoder requires only the
   initialization of a handful of variables.

   The LZJH algorithm uses a dictionary of 1525 entries, a total of only
   16K of dictionary memory, for the IPComp application.  During the
   encode process unmatched characters are encoded as ordinals and
   matched redundant strings of characters are encoded as codewords or
   string-extension lengths that represent the redundant strings.
   During the decode process the ordinals, codewords, and string-
   extension lengths are interpreted to re-create exactly the original
   datagram payload.

   The details of LZJH data compression can be found in [V44].

1.3 Intellectual Property Rights

   The IETF has been notified of intellectual property rights claimed in
   regard to some or all of the specifications contained in this
   document.  For more information, consult the online list of claimed
   rights.

1.4 Specification of Requirements

   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 [RFC2119].

2. Compression Process

   The compression of datagrams is performed by a function called the
   Encoder.

2.1 Encoder Dictionary

   The transmitting entity MUST reset the encoder dictionary prior to
   processing each datagram's payload, as specified in clause 7.5.1 of
   [V44].  This ensures that each datagram's payload can be correctly
   decompressed independently of any other, as is required in an
   environment where datagrams may be lost or received out of order.

   The transmitting entity MUST flush unprocessed encoder data after the
   last byte of the datagram has been passed into the encoder such that
   the compressed datagram can be transmitted as a unit.  The flush
   ensures that all data is processed and included in the output, i.e.,
   the compressed datagram is complete and no data from the current
   datagram will be processed with the next datagram.

2.2 Encoder Output

   The input to the payload compression algorithm is an IP datagram
   payload.  The output of the algorithm is a new (and hopefully
   smaller) payload.  The output payload contains the input payload's
   data in either compressed or uncompressed format.  The input and
   output payloads are each an integral number of bytes in length.

   If the uncompressed form is used, the output payload is identical to
   the input payload and the IPComp header is omitted.  If the
   compressed form is used, the output payload is prepended with the
   IPComp header and encoded as defined in clause 6.3 of [V44].

2.3 Padding

   A datagram payload compressed using LZJH always ends with a FLUSH
   codeword in the last one or two compressed data bytes.  The FLUSH
   codeword may start in the 2nd to the last compressed data byte and
   end in the last compressed data byte or be totally within the last
   data byte.  The FLUSH codeword is used to signal the end of the

   compressed data and differentiate compressed data from padding.  Any
   bits or bytes beyond the FLUSH codeword within the compressed payload
   are to be considered padding.

   The size of a compressed payload MUST be in whole octet units.

3. Decompression Process

   The decompression of datagrams is performed by a function called the
   Decoder.

3.1 Compressed Datagram

   If the received datagram is compressed, the receiver MUST reset the
   decoder dictionary prior to processing the datagram.  This ensures
   that each datagram can be decoded independently of any other datagram
   in the event datagrams are lost or received out of order.  Beginning
   with the decoder dictionary in the initial state, as specified in
   clause 7.5.2 of [V44], the receiver decodes the payload data field of
   the datagram according to the procedure specified in clause 6.4 of
   [V44].

3.2 Original Uncompressed Datagram

   If the received datagram is not compressed, the receiver does not
   perform compression decoding and passes the payload data field of the
   datagram unaltered to the next protocol layer.

4. IPComp Association (IPCA) Parameters

   IKE [RFC2409] MAY be used to negotiate the use of the LZJH
   compression algorithm to establish an IPCA, as defined in [RFC2393].

4.1 Transform ID

   The value of the LZJH Transform ID is IPCOMP_LZJH.  This value is
   used to negotiate the use of the LZJH data compression algorithm
   using IKE.

4.2 Security Association Attributes

   There are no other parameters required for the negotiation of the
   LZJH compression algorithm using IKE.

4.3 Manual configuration

   The CPI value IPCOMP_LZJH is used for manually configured IPComp
   Compression Associations.

4.4 Minimum packet size threshold

   As stated in [RFC2393], small packets may not compress well.
   Informal tests using the LZJH algorithm on internet web pages and e-
   mail files show that the average payload size that typically produces
   expanded data is approximately 50 bytes.  Thus, implementations may
   prefer not to attempt to compress payloads of approximately 50 bytes
   or smaller.

4.5 Compressibility test

   The LZJH algorithm, as described in [V44], is easily modified to
   incorporate an adaptive compressibility test, as referenced in
   [RFC2393].  Annex B of [V44] specifies the mechanism for including
   such a test in LZJH.

5. Security Considerations

   This document does not add any further security considerations to
   those discussed in [RFC2393].

6. IANA Considerations

   This document does not introduce any new name spaces.  The value of
   IPCOMP_LZJH is assigned from the IPsec IPCOMP transform identifier
   space defined in [RFC2407].  IANA has assigned a value of 4 for this
   purpose.

7. Acknowledgements

   This document is modeled upon [RFC2395].

8. References

   [LZ77]    Lempel, A., and Ziv, J., "A Universal Algorithm for
             Sequential Data Compression", IEEE Transactions On
             Information Theory, Vol. IT-23, No. 3, May 1977.

   [LZ78]    Lempel, A., and Ziv, J., "Compression of Individual
             Sequences via Variable Rate Coding", IEEE Transactions On
             Information Theory, Vol. IT-24, No. 5, Sep 1978.

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2393] Shacham, A., "IP Payload Compression Protocol (IPComp)",
             RFC 2393, December 1998.

   [RFC2395] Friend, R. and R. Monsour, "IP Payload Compression Using
             LZS", RFC 2395, December 1998.

   [RFC2407] Piper, D., "The Internet IP Security Domain of
             Interpretation for ISAKMP", RFC 2407, November, 1998.

   [RFC2409] Harkins, D. and D. Carrel, "The Internet Key Exchange", RFC
             2409, November 1998.

   [V44]     ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T)
             Recommendation V.44 "Data Compression Procedures", November
             2000.

9. Authors' Addresses

   Jeff Heath
   Hughes Network Systems
   10450 Pacific Center Ct.
   San Diego, CA  92121

   Phone: 858-452-4826
   Fax:   858-597-8979
   EMail: jheath@hns.com


   John Border
   Hughes Network Systems
   11717 Exploration Lane
   Germantown, MD  20876

   Phone: 301-601-4099
   Fax:   301-601-4275
   EMail: border@hns.com

10. Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  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.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.