W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: Call for Consensus: Frame size (to address #553)

From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 20:43:11 +0000
To: Johnny Graettinger <jgraettinger@chromium.org>
cc: "K.Morgan@iaea.org" <K.Morgan@iaea.org>, ynir.ietf@gmail.com, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <52073.1405370591@critter.freebsd.dk>
In message <CAEn92To8hhtML_942EkwgZdrKFLExUf02HhX9tjhUvDgAkdEAg@mail.gmail.com>, Johnny Graetting
er writes:

>I think it's worse than this, because if the client sent a frame larger
>than the server's MAX_FRAME_SIZE immediately after connection, it was
>probably a HEADERS frame, and that frame needs to be processed or the
>compression context is hosed and the connection must be closed.

Please see my previous email for analysis why this is simply not the

If you disagree with my analysis please explain the scenario where
the client would send 16KB HEADERS to a device which have never
accepted frames larger than 256 bytes ?

Specifically, I want to know what's in that 16KB HEADER frame and
why it is there...

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 14 July 2014 20:43:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:09 UTC