Issues
------
* ietf-tapswg/api-drafts (+7/-1/💬15)
7 issues created:
- Ranking criteria for Protocol Option not described (by zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1102 [Implementation] [discuss]
- Diff between protocol specific properties and protocol properties (by zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1101 [API] [discuss]
- Placement of section 9.1.2 and Section 11 of Interface document (by zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1096 [API] [discuss]
- Minor comments/nits on interface document (by zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1095
- Use of Undefined type as default (by zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1094 [API]
- Should we use normative language for restricting multiple identifiers on a endpoint? (by zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1093 [API] [discuss]
- Be more specific on namespace (by zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1092 [API] [discuss]
7 issues received 15 new comments:
- #1101 Diff between protocol specific properties and protocol properties (2
by mwelzl, zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1101 [API] [discuss]
- #1096 Placement of section 9.1.2 and Section 11 of Interface document (1 by mwelzl)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1096 [API] [discuss]
- #1095 Minor comments/nits on interface document (2 by mwelzl, zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1095 [API]
- #1093 Should we use normative language for restricting multiple identifiers on a endpoint? (1 by gorryfair)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1093 [API] [discuss]
- #1092 Be more specific on namespace (5 by gorryfair, mwelzl)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1092 [API] [discuss]
- #1087 relation between path property change and system policy (2 by philsbln, zaheduzzaman)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1087 [Architecture]
- #1082 Should there be no requirement on letting the user of the TAPS system about a special feature not applied to the Connection? (2 by mwelzl, philsbln)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1082 [Architecture]
1 issues closed:
- Confusing "Connection" https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/1086 [Architecture]
Pull requests
-------------
* ietf-tapswg/api-drafts (+4/-1/💬4)
4 pull requests submitted:
- s/Connection/connection in one place (by mwelzl)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/1100
- Items 2, 3, 4 of #1095 (nits) (by mwelzl)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/1099 [API]
- Be more specific on namespace (by mwelzl)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/1098 [API]
- API: default value for "Timeout for keep alive packets". (by mwelzl)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/1097 [API]
1 pull requests received 4 new comments:
- #1098 Be more specific on namespace (4 by gorryfair, mwelzl)
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/1098 [API]
1 pull requests merged:
- s/Connection/connection in one place
https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/pull/1100 [Architecture]
Repositories tracked by this digest:
-----------------------------------
* https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts
_______________________________________________
Taps mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
