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).
Regards,
Oleg
On Fri, D
On Dec 22, 2022, at 9:36 AM, Oleg Pekar 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 impleme
I would like to see this draft adopted. I need to work on implementing
TEAP. For this I'd like to have a draft that I could use, and while doing
the work, help by providing comments.
Thanks,
Heikki
On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 at 00:29, Peter Yee wrote:
> This is an adoption call for RFC 7170bis
> (draf
Alan,
I view this differently. First, we don't have good deployment numbers
for TEAP. If we bump the version and nobody is using TEAP, then nobody
will care. If we don't bump the version and people ARE using TEAP,
we'll get to hear from everyone who cares! From a code standpoint, I
imagin
On Dec 22, 2022, at 5:00 PM, Eliot Lear wrote:
> I view this differently. First, we don't have good deployment numbers for
> TEAP. If we bump the version and nobody is using TEAP, then nobody will
> care. If we don't bump the version and people ARE using TEAP, we'll get to
> hear from every
