On 6/5/2015 4:29 AM, Mirja Kühlewind wrote: > I do have the feeling that parts of what Joe wants to discuss should > however be in the third doc. And therefore I think that the current > first doc is not the taps flagship doc because for me a flagship doc > (and we probably need to define this term ;-) ) is the doc that you > point people to as the first thing to read after the work was finished...?
Perhaps "flagship" isn't a useful word for either doc. IMO, this is a "foundation" doc, and as such needs to set the groundwork for other docs. As to what doc we'll point people at when this is done, that could be a BCP, it could be a new protocol (experimental, presumably), etc. But we're nowhere near understanding what that last doc will be if we can't agree on what a protocol or API is. Joe _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
