Re: Cost analysis: (was: Getting to Consensus: CONTINUATION-related issues)

In message <>
, Greg Wilkins writes:

>It looks like there are many use-cases and examples that illustrate how
>difficult it can be to apply a limit expressed in compressed bytes.   So
>this just further convinces me that the only workable limit is one
>expressed in uncompressed bytes and applied by the sender.

This would be bad-ish for speed, it forces all proxies to always decompress
(or ignore the limit and hope).

>I also conclude that not having a limit is not really an option, because
>limits do exist even if they are not declared.


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 Sunday, 20 July 2014 07:19:18 UTC