On 4/13/2016 7:20 AM, Kyle Rose wrote:
>> Not in an RFC, IMO. Doing so sets details of the interface in stone,
>> whether by declaration or implication.
>>
>> If you can't do it without that sort of example, IMO you have not
>> succeeded in the "abstract" part of an abstract API.
> 
> Is there an example you'd recommend of an RFC that does this the right way?

The best one is one of the oldest - RFC793, but that focuses on data
plane events and connection status, rather than parameters for
extensions such as this.

However, IMO, it's still a good reference.

Joe

_______________________________________________
Tcpinc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc

Reply via email to