- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 21:18:23 +0200
- To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, "K.Morgan@iaea.org" <K.Morgan@iaea.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, Martin Dürst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 07:02:41PM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <CABkgnnURYFsYq7WwSKpSbE8XXjUBFxcXTDJVkD5H5ByZyriKXA@mail.gmail.com> > , Martin Thomson writes: > > >1. Assuming L1 is the 14 bits in the header and L2 is the 64 bits > >before the payload, is the length of the frame: > > a. L2 > > b. L1 << 64 | L2 > > c. L2 << 14 | L1 > > d. L1 + L2 > > e. ? > > If we make L2 8 byte wide, I'd prefer a) > > >2. If the bit is set, do the 8 additional bytes count toward this number? > > I'd prefer "no" I agree with Poul-Henning on both responses. They are the choices with the least operations and the least chances of doing the wrong thing. Willy
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 19:18:53 UTC