- From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 23:01:05 +0000
- To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- cc: Stefan Eissing <stefan.eissing@greenbytes.de>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
-------- In message <CABkgnnVuWHQkpcu3yxAxisxziGqMmJ_vKVStUn-1UdbBKak0HQ@mail.gmail.com>, Martin Thomson writes: >> What if it keeps hammering you with *only* frames which get ignored ? >> >> What if it does so at very high rate, because it is buggy or hostile ? >> >> What if the buggy implementation was in several million Internet-Of-Shit >> things that got poured into concrete years ago ? >> >> There's got to be _some_ limit to patience ? > >See http://httpwg.org/specs/rfc7540.html#dos Yes, I've seen that. What I'm asking is if we should try to avoid have N different critieria for N different implementations or if it makes sense to try to coordinate some sort of same-ish criteria. -- 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, 17 February 2017 23:01:35 UTC