Thanks for the KIP. +1 (binding) from me. A few minor comments: 1. We should add a note to the backwards compatibility section explaining the impact of throwing DuplicateSequenceException (a new exception) from `send`. As I understand it, it's not an issue, but good to include it in the KIP.
2. For clarity, it's good to highlight in some way the new fields in the protocol definition itself 3. I understand that you decided not to add max.message.bytes because it's unrelated to this KIP. I'll try to persuade you that we should, but it's not a blocker if you don't agree. The reasons are: 1. The implementation effort to add it is minimal since it's a topic config like message format version, 2. It's clearly beneficial for the producer to have that information, 3. It's compact (just a number), 4. It's nice to avoid another protocol bump for a small change like that. Thanks, Ismael On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:51 PM, Apurva Mehta <apu...@confluent.io> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to start a vote for KIP-192: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > 192+%3A+Provide+cleaner+semantics+when+idempotence+is+enabled > > Thanks, > Apurva >
