> Adding filler is undoing most of the compression. Really? Would I not just get a not quite constant stream of (unencrypted) data that‘s small enough to send

> Adding filler is undoing most of the compression. Really? Would I not just get a not quite constant stream of (unencrypted) data that‘s small enough to send at a low bandwidth? And when that data arrives at less than the maximum bandwidth of the channel that I actually use, I just add some filler. And then I encrypt that now really constant stream of data.