Of course, at some point it starts to make sense to do RLE. -Ekr
On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 6:43 AM Martin Thomson <m...@lowentropy.net> wrote: > Why not go all in - make this a byte string and start from 0x80 in the > first byte. When we define the 9th flag, we add another byte. Then you > have up to 2040 flags (though it might pay to split the space before that). > > struct { > opaque<1..255> flags; > } Flags; > > Otherwise, the first adopter of this pays 10 bytes where they would > previously have paid 4. Obviously there is a network effect at the third.. > Since I'm writing a draft that will aim to depend on this, I have a vested > interest in using this. > > If you wanted to make it more attractive to me, then maybe porting some of > the existing flags across might make it more appealing. > > On Wed, Mar 27, 2019, at 13:08, Yoav Nir wrote: > > > > > > > On 27 Mar 2019, at 12:26, Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed 2019-03-27 10:52:20 +0100, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos wrote: > > >> Right. What about defining a set of extensions (e.g., 2 extensions) of > > >> flags as: > > >> > > >> struct { > > >> uint64 flags; > > >> } Flags; > > > > > > If we're going to be doing this kind of bit-shaving, this is the way to > > > go, starting with a single CommonFlags extension -- and maybe even a > > > uint32 or uint16, with the bitfield registry under tight WG control. If > > > we exhaust that space, then we just define a CommonFlags2 extension. > > > > > > If someone wants an experimental boolean extension to play with, they > > > can always use an empty extension. They can apply for a bit in > > > CommonFlags if they find that the compactness is warranted. > > > > > > > OK. You got me convinced. > > > > In the spirit of revising quickly and revising often, I’ve uploaded > version -01: > > > > HTML: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-nir-tls-tlsflags > > DIFF: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-nir-tls-tlsflags-01 > > > > Yoav > > > > _______________________________________________ > > TLS mailing list > > TLS@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls > > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls