#537: Remove segments (consensus call)


On 1 Jul 2014, at 4:40 am, Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 30 June 2014 11:23, David Krauss <potswa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> That's an argument for the new application negotiation token.
>> Such a proxy should only be put in a place where no negotiation is necessary. Bailing out at any END_SEGMENT would be acceptable then.
> There's an obvious counterargument to that one...
> That's fine, but if you want to operate sans-standard, then you can
> add your own END_SEGMENT.
> I really don't care either way here.  I'm just enumerating the
> options, and noting that what is currently specified isn't
> particularly well-supported.  Our responsibility is to either more
> clearly define it, or remove it.


It sounds like we're leaning towards removing it - can people live with that?

Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2014 05:02:54 UTC