- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 09:54:56 -0700
- 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 22 April 2014 00:48, Jeff Pinner <jpinner@twitter.com> wrote: > I don't think I follow. Are you saying that the overhead of always splitting > frames is negligible so it's ok to always split frames in order to not have > a discontinuity in padding? No. I'm saying that if you can't break an arbitrary payload up into 2^14-7 byte chunks (plus 8 bytes) without leaking information about the length, then 2^14-1 is no different. > That seems to be saying that implementations that don't always split frames > could have an issue but they should just "do the right thing" instead of > forcing it by calling out the restriction in the protocol itself. Nothing of the sort. The point was that if you want to pad perfectly (whatever that means), then it is possible. You seem to be claiming that it is impossible.
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2014 16:55:24 UTC