+1 From: Trans [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stephen Kent Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 3:53 PM Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Trans] [trans] #59 (rfc6962-bis): Clarify STH versioning
Ben, Whoops. Sorry my response was not on target. But, while we're on the topic of response to issues, I find use of github for communicating of issues to be very inconvenient. First, the URLs in the messages are broken into two lines, so I have to cut and paste them together to get to the right page. Second, the lines in the files are often very long, so I have to scroll to the right to read what has been written. Is there a good reason that the text for proposed resolution of issues is not being sent via messages to this list, as is common IETF practice? Someone who wants to track what is happening in trans should be able to look at the mail and see what is being changed/proposed, etc. Using github adds a layer of indirection that is at best awkward, as noted above. Steve On 3 March 2015 at 16:58, Stephen Kent <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Ben, The issue here is not whether, at this time, we have identified an need for a v2 STH. The issue is that the doc needs to describe how the system will transition to a new version, if it is ever needed. That may indeed be _an_ issue, but it is not the issue this ticket describes!  Steve #59: Clarify STH versioning Comment ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>):  I can't find anywhere that requires a v2 STH.  However, I agree that we do not need to make this change yet: if we  discover a need for extensions in an STH, then we can introduce a v2 STH  and new APIs that deal with v2 STHs. Existing code can continue to use v1  STHs and the corresponding APIs. _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
_______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
