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

Re: HPACK problems (was http/2 & hpack protocol review)

From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 12:00:35 +0200 (CEST)
To: Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>
cc: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, "K.Morgan@iaea.org" <K.Morgan@iaea.org>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, "C.Brunhuber@iaea.org" <C.Brunhuber@iaea.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1405061155440.26004@tvnag.unkk.fr>
On Tue, 6 May 2014, Cory Benfield wrote:

> As an example of the under-specification, consider that the reference set 
> and header sets are defined as unordered but do not say whether they may 
> contain duplicate elements. My assumption was that they could not and so I 
> could assume all implementations will join multiple values with null bytes, 
> but that assumption has not been made elsewhere (nghttp2 certainly doesn't).

Perhaps you can suggest an updated wording for the spec that makes it clearer?

I (and others) have used nghttp2 quite a lot for interop lately so I want to 
be sure that what it does is what the spec says so that we don't interop 
against something not actually compliant!

> These interop bugs with HPACK are ridiculously difficult to catch.

Any more than other compression or encryption interop bugs (I'm just 
suggesting that the area of compression/checksumming/encryption makes annoying 
interop debugging)? If so, what is it that makes HPACK more difficult than 
others?

-- 

  / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2014 10:01:05 UTC

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