[OTR-dev] New OTR Protocol draft: please look over

[Ian Goldberg]

On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 08:22:18PM +0200, Paul Wouters wrote:
> But the fragments have an "id", right? The spec said:

The *fragments* have an id (as in "1/3", "2/3", "3/3"), but *reassembled
packets* don't (unlike, say, in IP).

> ?OTR,<fragmentnumber>,<totalfragments>,data
> 
> So in this case you could just save the fragments (within reason) and
> reassemble them when you have all the fragments.

The protocol doc specifies just accumulating fragments as they come in,
but it amounts to the same thing.

> Though I guess it hardly makes sense to do so, because for any non
> fragmented OTR message, you wouldn't be able to properly read it,

I don't understand this sentence.  Most OTR messages will be
unfragmented; surely you'll be able to read them.

> I think the assumption here is that messages can never be delivered
> out of order, and if you receive a fragment while missing the 
> previous fragments, you disgard all of them and return an error.

That's right.

   - Ian