- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 06:07:59 +0000
- To: Roberto Peon <grmocg@gmail.com>
- cc: K.Morgan@iaea.org, Greg Wilkins <gregw@intalio.com>, Michael.Bishop@microsoft.com, ietf-http-wg@w3.org, martin.thomson@gmail.com
In message <CAP+FsNenv1hFfmWCFL2AAY5iK-2RnQQ7HjX89TP+kz1_G__UiQ@mail.gmail.com> , Roberto Peon writes: >Continuations could be used with small header sizes, and should not be >confused with the size/anti-backwards compatibility arguments But why would you do that ? When and where are multiple frames in a design which breaks any kind of sensible protocol-layering better than a cleanly layered format where framing has simple and easy to implement rules ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Friday, 27 June 2014 06:08:21 UTC