Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

And that still leaves the question of why spec a payload (much less 64k "for flexibility") in a TCP heartbeat exchange.



Because it's the same heartbeat message used for DTLS, where the heartbeat and padding allows for variable-length probes with request and response having varying size.


That is understood, Tom. The question remains why spec the same for two distinct transport layer protocols.

[edit: actually I was under the impression that the payload addressed response order concerns in UDP.]


(It's Thomas). Because it would have made even less sense to define a TLS-specific heartbeat and a DTLS-specific heartbeat.

In the hierarchy of sensible TLS decisions, you have, from most to least reasonable:

1. Not adding new heartbeat extensions to DTLS or TLS.

2. Adding new heartbeat extensions to DTLS only.

3. Adding the same new heartbeat extensions to DTLS and TLS.

4. Adding two different new heartbeat extensions, one for DTLS and the other TLS.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: