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

Re: Frame Length Restrictions

From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 14:06:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CABkgnnU4=OB30HMJF9EahMOgUuG8zorF+UvZ+jyXCGwvtsu9+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com>
Cc: Johnny Graettinger <jgraettinger@chromium.org>, Patrick McManus <mcmanus@ducksong.com>, K.Morgan@iaea.org, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 21 April 2014 13:20, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote:
[lots]

I was there :)

I guess that I just don't find the problem particularly appealing.  I
understand the mathematics; if an originating server or client fills
packets precisely, there is no space to use for padding and the only
option is an 8 byte chunk.  It's probably more due to a reluctance to
accept the premise.

The part of the premise that is most problematic is the one where you
assume the intermediary cannot re-frame packets.

A sender that knows that it might want to pad can easily frame to in
16376 byte chunks.  And then any amount of padding is available to
them.  And that option is available to every sender, intermediary or
otherwise.
Received on Monday, 21 April 2014 21:06:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:30 UTC