IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-bikeshed-length-00.txt

Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> Fri, 20 March 2020 06:50 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-http-wg-request+bounce-httpbisa-archive-bis2juki=lists.ie@listhub.w3.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6EB3A1654 for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.651
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.651 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w_MMwTjhJOQd for <ietfarch-httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:50:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lyra.w3.org (lyra.w3.org [128.30.52.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EA113A164C for <httpbisa-archive-bis2Juki@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 23:50:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lists by lyra.w3.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <ietf-http-wg-request@listhub.w3.org>) id 1jFBQU-0005k3-J5 for ietf-http-wg-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 06:46:38 +0000
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 06:46:38 +0000
Resent-Message-Id: <E1jFBQU-0005k3-J5@lyra.w3.org>
Received: from mimas.w3.org ([128.30.52.79]) by lyra.w3.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1jFBQS-0005jD-MG for ietf-http-wg@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 06:46:36 +0000
Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60] helo=1wt.eu) by mimas.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <w@1wt.eu>) id 1jFBQQ-0002a6-TA for ietf-http-wg@w3.org; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 06:46:36 +0000
Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 02K6kIk0021352; Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:18 +0100
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2020 07:46:18 +0100
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20200320064618.GA21346@1wt.eu>
References: <3DD75975-2CA3-4071-974C-922121689310@mnot.net> <CAH_hAJGU=2OG-QRKSiauTFzHxLXdUBAc4ngLy93b-b3MbNLiKA@mail.gmail.com> <17273.1584633212@critter.freebsd.dk> <20200319161130.GA19209@1wt.eu> <17396.1584635103@critter.freebsd.dk> <C5009015-BE9D-48EC-AF95-4FAEB1A7BE7F@mnot.net> <ebea7134-3da6-44be-b445-7f79d1717f2b@www.fastmail.com> <29690.1584662529@critter.freebsd.dk> <29ECDF59-DB00-4037-8D43-6F7329388116@mnot.net> <d5b892d9-b6e0-491b-9169-4f5480baf4cd@www.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d5b892d9-b6e0-491b-9169-4f5480baf4cd@www.fastmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=62.212.114.60; envelope-from=w@1wt.eu; helo=1wt.eu
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.9
X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Report: BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, W3C_AA=-1, W3C_IRA=-1, W3C_WL=-1
X-W3C-Scan-Sig: mimas.w3.org 1jFBQQ-0002a6-TA c6bfd127cb81fe0ce94a0f617924551f
X-Original-To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-nottingham-bikeshed-length-00.txt
Archived-At: <https://www.w3.org/mid/20200320064618.GA21346@1wt.eu>
Resent-From: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
X-Mailing-List: <ietf-http-wg@w3.org> archive/latest/37474
X-Loop: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Resent-Sender: ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ietf-http-wg.w3.org>
List-Help: <https://www.w3.org/Mail/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-http-wg-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:42:07AM +1100, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2020, at 11:22, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> > > On 20 Mar 2020, at 11:02 am, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> > > In message <ebea7134-3da6-44be-b445-7f79d1717f2b@www.fastmail.com>, "Martin Tho
> > > mson" writes:
> > >> Sure, the numbers will be smaller, but why have the rounding at all?
> > > 
> > > To make sure it is not precise enough for framing use.
> > This
> 
> And so when someone rounds up and expects that to be ample space, what then?
> I'm not sure that I agree that this is a valid threat model.
> 
> Seems like over-rotating to me.  If implementations routinely encounter
> values that don't match the actual length, then they will learn not to depend
> on the two being the same.

The request was to have a size indicator to provide a progress bar, which
this seems to address fine. If the requirement is to have something more
accurate, then of course it's not enough, but at the same time comes again
the risk that it's misused (e.g. to size a malloc()).

Willy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email