Joe Clarke (jclarke) <[email protected]> wrote: > One thing that occurs to me – not to throw a wrench in this – is why > not make pcap informational (like we did with TACACS+)? I suppose one > reason to make it historical is if the pcap format is no longer being > used (as opposed to pcapng).
pcap -- historical. No updates, never gonna revise it. pcap"ng" -- informational, expect standards track Updates in the future. Guy's point about version fields being not that useful; if we need them then the extensibility of the pcapng was done wrong. -- Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
