On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 05:01:57PM +0000, Dave Thaler wrote: > In an email last week to the list I mentioned Informational as a possibility. > I don't have a strong preference, but I have a weak preference for Proposed > Standard status. > > As an implementer, I would want to make sure that ebpf-for-windows, > PREVAIL, and uBPF all do the same thing, ideally matching Linux for everything > the former projects support, to allow using consistent tooling. This would be even more important for any of the potential NVMe use cases. Compared to even ebpf-for-windows it is a fairly niche use case, and the last thing we'd need was our own ABI and toolchain.
