Re: Content-Transfer-Encoding "packet"
Roy Fielding (fielding@beach.w3.org)
Mon, 24 Jul 1995 17:37:24 -0400
> > The advantages that the one-byte packet-size has is that it takes up
> > a minimal amount of space in the stream of bits to the transfer and
> > is trivial for any system to produce or consume. Allowing larger
> > packets means we have to use decimal (with the additional CRLF delimiters)
> > or hope that everyone remembers to read the number in network byte order.
>
>I acknowledge a small space improvement (see below). I wouldn't rank
>it as "onorous". I think "network byte order" is a red herring -- you
>would be converting a decimal number to binary.
That is an "or", as in we could send the number using a binary integer
if the integer was restricted to network-byte-order interpretation, but
implementations are notorious for screwing that up in spite of the specs.
>Here is a comparison of the two for selected message sizes. (Please
That is a useful comparison for data transfer overhead (thanks),
but what we really need is a comparison of processing overhead,
taking into account the vagaries of TCP socket reads/writes.
Keep it coming ....
.......Roy