On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 17:43 +0100, Rainer Gerhards wrote: > Chris, > > while I think this sounds very tempting, I also think there are some > inherent problems with it: > > #1 you do not know *where* (more precise: after how many octets) that > element is present > In extreme cases, it might only be valid after more then 64k > > #2 it could become truncated > Structured data is not guarded against truncation. > > #3 architectural concerns > I do not think it is appropriate for a lower layer to obtain information > from an upper-layer field. That would require the lower layer to parse > the upper layer field, which it conceptionally should not even be aware > of. > > All in all, I am in strong favour of a dedicated tls-transport only > header for the octet count.
Absolutely agree and I also like the text based format. -- Bazsi _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
