- From: John Franks <john@math.nwu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 09:53:06 -0500 (CDT)
- To: Dave Kristol <dmk@allegra.att.com>
- Cc: fielding@beach.w3.org, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com
According to Dave Kristol: > Roy Fielding <fielding@beach.w3.org> said: > > [...] > > Also, I've been playing around with various formats and have > > found that the optimum for most transfers uses a simple one-byte > > prefix to encode the length of each packet, with a zero byte > > indicating end-of-packets. > Could you elaborate? I'd be curious to know the tradeoffs you examined > before choosing this approach. In particular, was the overhead of an > ASCII packet length (i.e., human readable) so onorous? Also a maiximum packet size of 255 bytes seems quite small. Could you explain the rationale for that? John Franks
Received on Monday, 24 July 1995 07:53:57 UTC