The need for IFPC support?

["Shtein, Ilya" <Il...@fisglobal.com>]

Greetings,

 

By looking at gadgets.rpc, it seems like none of the modern browsers
uses IFPC-based remoting channel. However, it is still kept as a
fallback. If I only have to support modern browsers, e.g. IE7 / 8 /FF
3.x / latest versions of Chrome / Safari, do I need to worry about IFPC
channel compatibility? For example, IFPC in IE will limit me to 2k, and
my data may exceed that size limit... so my question is - is it safe to
assume that I will never encounter the need to send my data through the
IFPC channel if I support IE7/8? Other browsers listed above?

 

Thanks!

 

_____________

The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
_____________

Re: The need for IFPC support?

[John Hjelmstad <fa...@google.com>]

I'm unaware of any browser that uses IFPC. It's kept around out of general
paranoia and for one particular use case: when you need the
gadgets.rpc.setParentVerifiable() API, in which the receiver of a given
message needs to validate the URL of the party that's sending it a message.
The NIX (IE6/7) and FE (FF2) transports, in particular, utilize techniques
that do not ultimately depend on the browser's same-domain policy, so
parties can in theory craft messages masquerading as being sourced from an
inaccurate domain.

--John

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Shtein, Ilya <Il...@fisglobal.com>wrote:

> Greetings,
>
>
>
> By looking at gadgets.rpc, it seems like none of the modern browsers
> uses IFPC-based remoting channel. However, it is still kept as a
> fallback. If I only have to support modern browsers, e.g. IE7 / 8 /FF
> 3.x / latest versions of Chrome / Safari, do I need to worry about IFPC
> channel compatibility? For example, IFPC in IE will limit me to 2k, and
> my data may exceed that size limit... so my question is - is it safe to
> assume that I will never encounter the need to send my data through the
> IFPC channel if I support IE7/8? Other browsers listed above?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> _____________
>
> The information contained in this message is proprietary and/or
> confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please: (i) delete the
> message and all copies; (ii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message
> in any manner; and (iii) notify the sender immediately. In addition, please
> be aware that any message addressed to our domain is subject to archiving
> and review by persons other than the intended recipient. Thank you.
> _____________
>