On 4/7/17 1:05 AM, Eran Messeri wrote:
> Instead, we could:
> (1) Clarify why BCP 190 may not apply here (based on experience
> deploying V1 logs)
> (2) Remove the 'ct/v2' portion from all the URIs.
> 
> Any preferences? Mine would be for (2), but it's not a strong preference.

I think that in general, when there's a deviation from a BCP
it's a good idea to document why it's inapplicable - the question
is very likely to come up at some point during the review process.
I don't think that removing the ct/v2 portion would be sufficient to
resolve the conflict with BCP 190, although it may be
desirable for other reasons.

Melinda


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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

Reply via email to