Sorry for being late, I just saw this. I have a concern about the compatibility story:
1. Do we know how common use of protocol is? While this is an improvement, the benefits are a bit small (IMO) and if this will break a large number of installations (or will make the upgrade to 3.0 more painful and therefore less likely to happen) - maybe it is't worth it. 2. Should we add a PR to 2.8 that will print deprecation warnings if protocol is used? This way people will at least know what is coming. Gwen On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 1:21 AM Tom Bentley <tbent...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > If there are no comments about this minor change in the next day or two I > will start a vote. > > Kind regards, > > Tom > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:10 PM Tom Bentley <tbent...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to start a discussion on a small KIP which proposes stricter > > parsing of host:port addresses in various configs for Kafka 3.0: > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-697%3A+Stricter+parsing+of+addresses+in+configs > > > > I'd be grateful for any feedback people may have. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Tom > > -- Gwen Shapira Engineering Manager | Confluent 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap Follow us: Twitter | blog
