[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: TO COMPRESS OR NOT TO CMPRS (please reply)
At 12:58 PM 2/18/97 -0500, Roy Pereira wrote:
>I don't like the idea of adding it to the pad length field. Although
>255 bytes of padding is more than enough, changing that fields role
>might break some current implementations.
Current implementations would never negotiate to turn on compression, so
they "should" never receive packets with the bit turned on and if they do,
they are probably talking to another "current implementation" where that
bit means another 128 bytes of padding are present. I don't think this is a
problem (other than the fact that I used the word "never" in the context of
software and protocols...probably a mistake I never should have made).
-Bob