On Dec 22, 2022, at 9:36 AM, Oleg Pekar <oleg.pekar.2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I would like to provide comments as well. We should also bump the version of > the protocol so as not to harm the existing implementations (yes, they > implemented the spec with filed errata, the spec is sometimes ambiguous but > those implementations are already on the market).
What we have is a situation where no one has implemented RFC 7170, and there is no practical path to implementing it. As a result, the -bis revision is documenting the implementations. i.e. "this is what's going on" versus "what should be going on". It would be more relevant to update the version when there are incompatible changes to the protocol, *and* existing implementations which need to know which version they're negotiating. Since there is only one "TEAP version 1", I would argue that there's no need to change the version. Plus, if we change the version, then people have no idea what's currently implemented. TEAP version 1 becomes an undocumented mess of unknowns. As an implementor, I'm happy to declare RFC 7170 as irrelevant, and to issue a new standard which defines TEAP version 1 "as implemented". Alan DeKok. _______________________________________________ Emu mailing list Emu@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu
