RE: Header in TCP Mapping

["Gould, James" <JGould@verisign.com>]

Scott,

I would prefer that the total length not include the 4 octets, since the
client and server would have to subtract 4 from the total length to
determine how much to read.  Including the 4 octets in the total length
provides no value.   

Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Hollenbeck, Scott [mailto:shollenbeck@verisign.com]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 8:13 AM
To: 'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'
Subject: Header in TCP Mapping


I've received a private comment about the EPP header as currently described
in the TCP mapping draft.  Here's what it currently says:

"Total Length (32 bits): The total length of the EPP datagram measured
in octets.  The octets contained in this field MUST be included in the
total length calculation."

and here's what I was planning on changing it to:

"Total Length (32 bits): The total length of the EPP data unit measured
in octets in network (big endian) byte order.  The octets contained in
this field MUST be included in the total length calculation."

The comment (really a question) was along the lines of "why do we need to
include the 4 octets for the length field in the total length calculation?"
I'm not sure that there is any real value, but before I change the wording
I'd like to ask if anyone does see any value in always adding those 4 octets
to the total length.  In short, if we have an XML instance that contains 200
octets, is it better to have the length field say "200" or "204"?

-Scott-