W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: HTTP/2 Header Encoding Status Update

From: Adrien W. de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 09:13:47 +0000
To: "James Cloos" <cloos@jhcloos.com>, "James M Snell" <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <em6672ff78-238a-437f-bb20-23b4e632ba05@bombed>


------ Original Message ------
From: "James Cloos" <cloos@jhcloos.com>
To: "James M Snell" <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Sent: 3/03/2013 11:03:18 a.m.
Subject: Re: HTTP/2 Header Encoding Status Update
>>>>>>  "JMS" == James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> writes:
>
>JMS> ​LSB.. I'm currently following the same scheme as protobufs but 
>that's not
>JMS> set in stone.
>
>IP itself is Big Endian. No protocol over it should choose otherwise.

what proportion of hardware processing HTTP is big-endian?


>
>There is too much room for confusion otherwise.

It's not actually that hard to get right.
you use library functions to get the information from TCP and lower 
anyway.

IME you're more likely to get errors when using big-endian data, when 
you omit a htonl / ntohl.

Adrien
>
>If protobufs does so, that is a bug.
>
>-JimC
>--
>James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
>
Received on Sunday, 3 March 2013 09:14:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 3 March 2013 09:14:24 GMT