On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 06:38:09PM -0000, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Just to re-assert that the Independent Submissions Stream can publish
> Informational and Experimental RFCs.
Just if its approriate to ask on a list where i could probably wade through
rfcs to find
the answer: Whats the relevance/differentiation of "experimental" for
independent stream ?
Other than that:
- Is there anywhere information about the available SOCK implementations
sufficiently
detailed to understand their ability and use-case benefits to interoperate
(between
client SDK/shim-library and server ?
- For those existing or planned future implementations, is it possible to
collect insight
into how eager the implementers would be to adopt the draft proposed
functionality ?
- For any implementer/implementations showing interest in adoption, where their
names collected ?
If this did all happen in some discussions on int-area, i would still prefer to
see this
salient information collected in a document. Even if it might not be this
draft, but an -ops
draft, but especially when this goes ISE, it should be much less a problem to
have
actual dadoption relevant information in a doc as opposed to jus the bare
protocol details.
Even if his is built on the push model of "standardize it and they
(implementers) will come",
it would (at last for me) still be highly useful to see a list of
implementations, and whether
or not the authors of this document reached out to the implemenations to query
about the
interest in this 'extension/version'.
Cheers
Toerless
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
