Robin MARX <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree there is significant overlap between PCAP and qlog conceptually > (though I did not know pcap was actually considered for adoption at the > IETF).
Please note that pcap (legacy) is intended as Informational.
PCAP-NG (I hate "NG" for a format that is now 10 years old!), is intended as
Standards Track.
> However, from my understanding, the PCAP format is strongly oriented
Your understanding is accurate for PCAP, but not for PCAP-NG.
If I had a do-over, PCAP-NG would have been pure-CBOR.
> Finally, I've added the QUIC wg in CC, as that's where most of the
> work/discussion will likely be done in the future.
Then, I suggest maybe the qlog ML should get killed, if you want discussion
on the QUIC list.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
