IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] frame length encoding

Pieter Hintjens <ph@imatix.com> Sat, 21 August 2010 21:27 UTC

Return-Path: <pieterh@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70FA83A68CC for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:27:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.966
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.966 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id apR3eaZotgUN for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:27:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vw0-f44.google.com (mail-vw0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F8ED3A67FE for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:27:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vws10 with SMTP id 10so4524948vws.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=xbdiDDmTV2n5CZ2CA4Y0w2uq8HffHxUhq/4xqtkwqb4=; b=BwGYKprc/8zQounfqQKEtu9/nMgYkiZTPEcSuJlyX8pDeBTvoJjpvuM/nP6Ein61U/ u+2DLB+NarTIBc3T+HaygcOQIcGHGDbF6E88hai3P1NJssGC733+K1wtViriDxnKNj/A gzJn+tL03mX5ZIce7U5faw9RyJ9Ue1hvSTsj0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; b=isbp9Ai6xQdR+WIkHarh8nlNjjWTm/Hr2O5kDnQHLeTsXrfQoqa2NWON3wVRos/t0x nw7zWLqvu/VgwIui0TQzFF7+W2jhHTVwSnjdzI63ovbWEGDXOmeCtzKqSAb3DhCRFAua MvRvK2rMyG62HetXVeaupDlO6gKKiFX3wuyOo=
Received: by 10.220.62.202 with SMTP id y10mr2026961vch.58.1282426091211; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: pieterh@gmail.com
Received: by 10.220.167.17 with HTTP; Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:27:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <d94ad0d7f0af55a23d41421be03b7ecc.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com>
References: <AANLkTimKbmcpgx8k0uXUWvCO=8w9pPrtV=3y4qh6363k@mail.gmail.com> <20100820192927.GA32620@1wt.eu> <4C6EEA55.2050205@hs-weingarten.de> <AANLkTinHqxUOZaVANFpC52t8FfgNw2L5_A-s9Az3Fm7p@mail.gmail.com> <9038007a07cb2e7f2659663b8bc6af82.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com> <8586ffdbc1c035a949df3965da5f489a.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com> <AANLkTinkYMN8LyU7432v2PZjrQ0Z7cN7mcwwzYwCwhON@mail.gmail.com> <8dea23aa73d8065b3f286852af659362.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com> <AANLkTim_-pAk8N8v2QTsBrk2qvArKXXZeESUuDdYZJ7u@mail.gmail.com> <969601515f702aa6b03857c6fdc0cdc3.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com> <AANLkTin4NZsaL6wBKGF7UNmeG3BeQmNR9QCuD5Kscv8W@mail.gmail.com> <d94ad0d7f0af55a23d41421be03b7ecc.squirrel@sm.webmail.pair.com>
From: Pieter Hintjens <ph@imatix.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 23:27:51 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: yUsUKc_twQpLhttwZUGDrEJ5cYM
Message-ID: <AANLkTimE32fxdx_DVZ-KLAYR+AQXuk6Xvg7k6Th5m9WV@mail.gmail.com>
To: shelby@coolpage.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] frame length encoding
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 21:27:39 -0000

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com> wrote:

> Peter am I correct that option 2 addresses your concerns about
> uncompressed packets possibly being larger than 126 bytes?

Option 2 is efficient enough for shorter messages but it still seems
unnecessarily complex.

The same frame can be encoded in different ways.  The magic numbers
are not obvious, and people will get them wrong.  The rules for
writing frames will be broken and things will work for a while and
then break.  It feels like a brittle design, bound to break in real
use.

We're balancing different needs but the most important requirement of
all must surely be simplicity so that implementors take less risk of
getting it wrong.

-
Pieter Hintjens
iMatix - www.imatix.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email