Change looks fine to me. Thanks Max
> 在 2016年7月13日，14:52，Vyom Tewari <vyom.tew...@oracle.com> 写道： > > Hi All, > > Please find the updated > webrev(http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Evtewari/8151788/webrev0.1/index.html). I > addressed the review comments. > > Thanks, > Vyom > > >> On Tuesday 12 July 2016 08:25 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: >> >> >>> On 7/12/2016 22:34, Pavel Rappo wrote: >>> What's the difference between no security buffer and an empty one (from the >>> com.sun.security.ntlm.Client#type3's perspective)? >> >> I quickly browse through the NTLM protocol and yes they look like the same >> in each case. (Except for one which I am not sure, is there any difference >> between no domain and empty domain?) In all cases where a security buffer is >> optional, there is a flag we can rely on, and no need to look at whether the >> offset of the security buffer is zero. >> >> So it does look safer to return a new byte[0] right inside >> readSecurityBuffer(int offset) when the offset is zero. >> >> Thanks >> Max >> >>> >>>> On 12 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Wang Weijun <weijun.w...@oracle.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> When there is no offset, there is no security buffer at all. When the >>>> length is zero, the security buffer is an empty byte array. >
