13 Apr
2019
13 Apr
'19
5:48 p.m.
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 6:32 PM Andrey Korolyov <andrey@xdel.ru> wrote:
Whoops, that was fun part my mind completely obsoleted and slipped out from the current understanding of the proposal.
Yeah, the thread is quite long already.
AFAICS nobody have ever proposed clear 'intentional' distinction over entire set of threads.
Exactly the idea of not treating accidental leaks as a policy violation seems to be the authors' goal from the day one. (in fact, allowing route leaks to be in the scope of the proposal would only make things even more messy IMO) -- Töma