[...]
>So it sounds as if we can assign a number before the RFC is issued for a new
>block type/link type/option code/etc., and update the registry when an I-D is
>issued or updated or an RFC is issued.
>
>> But, it can also just be a link to http://www.company.com/technote/foo.html,
>> or it
On Nov 12, 2015, at 8:26 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Guy Harris wrote:
>
>> I don't see what the problem is with different block types having
>> different option name spaces. Common code to handle options in all
>> block types wouldn't be that useful - that code wouldn't, for example,
>>
On Nov 10, 2015, at 5:05 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> I reviewed draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcapng, while it hasn't had an -01, some work
> has been occuring in the github copy, and so the effort isn't dead, just not
> as visible.
The official version of the spec is, indeed draft-tuexen-opsawg-pcap
