On 25/02/16 20:41, Ted Ross wrote:
I could live with this.  The only problem is that "type" is reserved by
the AMQP management spec to describe the entity-type.  We would need to
qualify it in some way (this problem exists in my proposal as well).

That is a shame. Is 'class' reserved? It could be an alternative to type that is still fairly familiar as a term ('category' might be another).

I think 'treatment' is pretty descriptive in that it describes how the
router treats the links and deliveries it gets from the endpoints.

It is descriptive, I agree. It just feels a little peculiar to me for probably the most visible/important of the fields. Not a huge issue (and I may get over it!).




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to