Cyclic Redundancy Codes, Checksums, and related issues for computer system data integrity.
Monday, August 4, 2014
CRC publication errata
Thanks to Prof. Berthold Gick at University of Applied Sciences in Koblenz Germany for finding a few bugs in my published CRC values. (And also thanks for a very thorough second-check of results -- this is an essential part of scholarly publication that is not acknowledged as often as it should be!)
I have updated presentations and papers that I can find with the following corrections:
From my FAA presentation materials:
Polynomial HD=2 HD=3 HD=4
0x80000d | 16,777,212 | 5815 | 509 (length in bits at that HD)
From my 2002 paper:
Polynomial 0x992c1a4c has a maximal HD=6 payload of 32738 bits (originally published as 32737)
From many publications the table of 16-bit and smaller CRCs:
11-bit polynomial 0x5d7 has a maximal HD=5 payload of 26 bits (originally published as 25)
Some of the "best" polynomial recommendations have been updated. If you are unsure about a polynomial from a previous publication, you can look up its properties here:
http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/crc/
and in the accompanying polynomial zoo (click on the polynomial size header in each column).
If anyone else spots an error please do let me know. This work happens time-available, but I do strive to eventually fix any bugs I know about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
32-bit CRCs might be insufficient for WiFi
A new paper suggests CRCs might not be enough for WiFi. Is It Time to Upgrade From CRC-32? / Mohit Balany; Craig Partridge (IEEE Xplore / ...
-
Sometimes we hear that someone plans to use a hash function for fault detection instead of a checksum. This is probably not the best idea, b...
-
Comparative speeds for different Checksum & CRC implementations. For more information see my new book: Understanding Checksums and Cy...
-
Checksums and CRCs involve a repeated computation over the length of a dataword that accumulates a result to form an FCS value. The accumul...
No comments:
Post a Comment