Re: Frames that manipulate set-based peer state

Ah - so you're just suggesting a change in name, not semantics?

> On 19 Jul 2016, at 11:28 AM, Martin Thomson <> wrote:
> On 19 July 2016 at 11:27, Mark Nottingham <> wrote:
>> a) indicating that, as of time of generation, the frames sent represent a complete set, but that it might be added to later
>> b) indicating that the set is complete for the rest of the lifetime of the connection
>> Correct?
> No, I was trying to avoid the implication that the frame contains ALL
> of the set.  I think that it is more useful to indicate that this is
> the end of the series of frames.

Mark Nottingham

Received on Tuesday, 19 July 2016 09:32:18 UTC