Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote: >> Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> wrote: >> > So, congratulations on this RFC. Should ANIMA consider an incompatible >> > update to RFC8992 to use these new CBOR tags instead of the existing ad >> > hoc solution? >> >> Maybe. I'm not sure. >> I will see about adapting my implementation and post a further opinion. >> >> > I don't think we have an installed base to worry about, and the >> > difference for an implementor is not very big. >> >> Yes, that's true. On the other hand, I'd hardly like to encourage IPv4 > ACPs.
> I said 8992 and I think you saw 8994...
Yeah, I get that :-)
But, no point in advertising in GRASP (over an ACP) an objective that only be
satisfied by going to the dataplane to do IPv4.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
