Re: Content-Transfer-Encoding "packet"
John Franks (john@math.nwu.edu)
Mon, 24 Jul 1995 09:53:06 -0500 (CDT)
According to Dave Kristol:
> Roy Fielding <fielding@beach.w3.org> said:
>
> [...]
> > Also, I've been playing around with various formats and have
> > found that the optimum for most transfers uses a simple one-byte
> > prefix to encode the length of each packet, with a zero byte
> > indicating end-of-packets.
> Could you elaborate? I'd be curious to know the tradeoffs you examined
> before choosing this approach. In particular, was the overhead of an
> ASCII packet length (i.e., human readable) so onorous?
Also a maiximum packet size of 255 bytes seems quite small. Could you
explain the rationale for that?
John Franks