Deb,

> On Jan 7, 2025, at 11:49 AM, Deb Cooley <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> How about:  
> 
> The addition of dynamic size packets adds the potential for leaks in the 
> padding.  The padding requirements in this document are the mitigation for 
> these issues. 

Whereas I don't understand what "leaks in the padding" is intended to mean.

Is the point you want that the zero is to avoid cases where random memory 
buffers might be accidentally exposing data in the BFD payloads?  That was one 
of the intents for the padding contents being zero, but if that's the point 
everyone has been hung up on, I can add a sentence making that explicit.

Note that "dynamic" sizes doesn't really impact this consideration.

-- Jeff

Reply via email to