OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

security-services message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [security-services] Bug in the bindings doc; wrong RFC

> If DEFLATE/RFC1951 is what was intended, and what is still desired, then 
> the specification is correct, although it is missing a bibliography 
> entry for the actual RFC.

Yes, this is definitely what was intended, and it does reference 1951 in
that section, but the bib. entry is missing.

> I will point out, however, that everyone seems to have implemented it 
> wrong.  Let me emphasize that:  everyone. Certainly, some of this is the 
> fault of errors in the Java documentation.  But it also has to make you 
> wonder if the spec itself doesn't, somehow, need improvement.

Well, it could say "don't be fooled by the incorrect Sun documentation", I
guess. ;-) Did anybody get it wrong that *wasn't* using Java or was led to
assume that the output of the Java classes was to be trusted?

I did think we needed samples to validate with because I didn't trust any
particular library without independent verification that it was producing
nothing but the DEFLATE stream. I'd be curious if the samples in the spec
are correct. I produced them by hand by attempting to strip the gzip header
off the output of gzip itself.

I asked a few times for people to give me samples I could verify with so
that we'd flag any problems...

-- Scott

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]