[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-talk] Tor and P2P (Hidden SMS)

2012/9/26 meh. <meh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> It's not pragmatist at all, it wastes time and resources doing
> replaces when it could have just been really binary and prepend the
> length of the packet, which is the sane way to do something like that
> instead of using an end of packet separator.

No, these few string replaces do not waste any time or resources, this
claim is totally ridiculous.

> Also protocol buffers would have been a better choice for something
> like that, it would have beeen even smaller than your protocol and
> easier to implement, it would have made the protocol self-documenting
> too.

The protocol is self documenting, just print the messages to the
console as they are, the commands mean what their names suggest, it is
so simple you can even simulate a complete handshake and chat session
in telnet manually. Not every hype of the day (xml, protobuf,
binary-json, etc) must be used only because it exists and someone
thinks it has a cool sounding name, sometimes a simple line of text is
enough to transmit a simple foo=bar key-value pair without needing to
wrap it into kilobytes of obfuscating bloat.
tor-talk mailing list