On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 2:50 PM David Vernet <void@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 01:10:38PM -0700, dthaler1968=40googlemail.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > At IETF 119, we agreed that "by address" should be changed to > > something else in the ISA. The term "legacy ID" was used during the > > discussion but Christoph (if I remember right) pointed out that such > > IDs are not deprecated per se. Hence "legacy" may not be the right > > word since we use that word with legacy packet access instructions > > that are deprecated. We decided to take further discussion to the > > list, hence this email. > > > > We need some term to distinguish them from BTF IDs, so another > > alternative might be "non-BTF ID". > > Non-BTF ID is fine with me. Any objections? If something later comes along supplanting BTF it will be the not-BTF not-non-BTF thing. This is bad. How about untyped identifiers? > > Thanks, > David > -- > Bpf mailing list > Bpf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bpf -- Astra mortemque praestare gradatim
