Re: [hybi] Framing take IV

Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> Wed, 04 August 2010 05:31 UTC

Return-Path: <gregw@webtide.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 208453A6817 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 22:31:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.792
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.792 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.675, BAYES_20=-0.74, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 NTuhDDE9iaGe for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 22:31:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-fx0-f44.google.com (mail-fx0-f44.google.com [209.85.161.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F3BF3A6BDB for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 22:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by fxm16 with SMTP id 16so1495405fxm.31 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.117.73 with SMTP id p9mr8261357faq.56.1280899893896; Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.223.57.12 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Aug 2010 22:31:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB8B01E0@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
References: <AANLkTinyrDoG5d_Ur6HVRy=SgMPjLzJtpJ++Ye=1DQdj@mail.gmail.com> <20100804022719.GT27827@shareable.org> <AANLkTi=MENta8H4A_ota=R==EJ3j0zAkPc7ai2qmsZiT@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinZE8-HSi-BJD8Oq3z3+9BXY8eMnZ4DAnOaiuT=@mail.gmail.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB8B01CD@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <AANLkTin-8zBw0m=Ac2uzbW4zZQ_cV5DyKrEuJV6+pMOe@mail.gmail.com> <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F03EB8B01E0@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 15:31:33 +1000
Message-ID: <AANLkTim+iF7S4WPhzwkSyNBxLtt_sAeQTsd0FuEDmm32@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
To: hybi@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001636c5b18b2b25d4048cf8bfa5"
Subject: Re: [hybi] Framing take IV
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: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 05:31:09 -0000

So it appears that I have over stated the near-consensus, as it looks like
that all we have is

  +--------------------------------------------------+
  |  ???   (?)             |  Length(?)              |
  +--------------------------------------------------+
   |                      Data                        |
  +--------------------------------------------------+

Where there are about 4 different proposals how to handle the ???  and at
least 3 contenders for encoding the length.

I propose that we iterate here forever or until somebody stands victorious
having proved definitively beyond a  shadow of a doubt that in all
circumstances (or at least in all circumstances that the victor cares about)
that they have defined the ultimate way to encode the length of a frame that
is immune from all security attacks and is so simple that it will be
enshrined as a self evident truth for all time.

Alternately we could just pick 1 length encoding, accept that maybe it is
not exactly the ultimate encoding for all people in all circumstances, but
that it is good enough for most cases,  and then we can move on.