> First, I hear and agree with Juergen's point that this is a second order > problem. Still, if there are those interested in working on it and documenting > what would be desirable, a bit of discussion isn't a bad thing.
+1 > Second, the minimum necessary seems to be an info model describing what > should be saved so that the files can be structured. If the I2RS data structures "on the wire," are efficient, atomic, and built in such a way as to invite extension where needed, why not just make the structure, "save off the tlvs as you send and receive, so they can be reparsed according to the same set of rules by some other process later?" In other words, do we need another format for the same data, if there's already one in place for on the wire use? Just a thought... > Third, we have the idea of multiple transports and transport channels in I2RS. +1 --we're already driving enough complexity into this thing... Too much, honestly. Russ _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
