|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI CRC considerationsDafna, I simply said reference (by means of source libraries containing Adler-32) with respect to Deflate et. al. This protection is not for serial bursts as this is already detected by CRC-32. There is a trade-off with respect to performance. Types of errors within a network are influenced by gaps in current protection. If using software, then Adler-32 offers advantages in performance that could be suitable for remaining errors. Doug > Doug, > > We explicitly said that either modulo (as originally in RFC1950) or some > test (as you showed) is necessary. > (In fact, there is even a better tradeoff between (1) calculating > a maximal > number of additions that can be > made for sure before the modulo needs to be addressed at all, and (2) > taking the test for each input > char). > > RCF1951 and RFC1952 describe the popular DEFLATE format used in Gzip and > PKZIP, to which Adler > contributed valuably. They do not mention the Adler-32 checksum. The same > goes to RFC 1979 and RFC 2394. > > We agree that CRC is slower in software implementation than Adler-32. > But, Adler can detect much less errors, as we pointed out, than CRC. > There are too simple error patterns that are missed by Adler. > > Dafna Sheinwald. > > > >
Home Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:30 2001 6315 messages in chronological order |