Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] OPSAWG Digest, Vol 159, Issue 10

From: "Douglas Gash (dcmgash)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2020 16:38:46 +0000

Thanks Alan,

Good point. I believe the largest possible packets would fully loaded author reply, which is a little over 3* 2^16, so anything over 2^18 must be illegal. I think that we can add that Implementations MUST allow control over maximum packet sizes, with recommendations at 2^16, as you suggest.

    Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2020 19:58:27 -0400
    From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
    To: [email-masked]
    Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-tacacs-18.txt
    Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
    Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
    
      One minor comment on reading the latest draft.  Section 4.1 defines the packet header, and defines a 32-bit length field:
    
      length
    
       The total length of the packet body (not including the header).
    
      It would be good to state limits on the values of this field.
    
      i.e. lengths larger than 2^24 are forbidden, and lengths larger than 2^16 are suspicious.
    
      Alan DeKok.