Roger Price
2022-Apr-19 06:56 UTC
[Nut-upsuser] I-D progress update - ISE comments - NETVER vs PROTVER
I have received comments from the ISE (Independent Submissions Editor) on NETVER/PROTVER and I would would like to get the list's consensus on how to proceed. NETVER vs PROTVER ----------------- The problem: the I-D uses PROTVER rather than NETVER, however 2.8.0 only supports NETVER. The argument in favour of PROTVER is that the command is not asking for the version of the _network_. It is asking for the version of the _protocol_. The argument in favour of NETVER is that it is currrently implemented in 2.8.0. Should the I-D revert to NETVER? I will follow whatever the list decides. Roger
Matus UHLAR - fantomas
2022-Apr-19 07:28 UTC
[Nut-upsuser] I-D progress update - ISE comments - NETVER vs PROTVER
On 19.04.22 08:56, Roger Price wrote:>I have received comments from the ISE (Independent Submissions Editor) >on NETVER/PROTVER and I would would like to get the list's consensus >on how to proceed. > >NETVER vs PROTVER >----------------- > >The problem: the I-D uses PROTVER rather than NETVER, however 2.8.0 >only supports NETVER. > >The argument in favour of PROTVER is that the command is not asking >for the version of the _network_. It is asking for the version of the >_protocol_. > >The argument in favour of NETVER is that it is currrently implemented in 2.8.0. > >Should the I-D revert to NETVER? I will follow whatever the list decides.can NETVER be declared as obsolete alternative to PROTVER? -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.