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

Re: h2 padding

From: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:45:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOdDvNq6WRLVMiyzAKd21OEZ+v91KRrPXmaRAR8B0h7oBtMDuw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:

> here is no
> need for padding within a frame.  The security need is for padding to be
> allowed after a frame when both are enveloped within an opaque stream.

Hi Roy -

Nobody has mentioned this yet in this thread so I will. The existing
design, which I think is universally regarded as awkward, meets the
requirement for 1 byte minimum pads which is rooted in Thai Duong's comment
here: https://github.com/http2/http2-spec/issues/344  .. a new frame would
either need a non standard frame header as Greg mentions (also awkward in a
different way!) or be too big.

Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2014 20:45:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 March 2016 09:57:10 UTC