I can.
Regards
Antoine.
Le 03/04/2019 à 02:32, Wes McKinney a écrit :
> I started a vote for the other Flight discussion thread, which will
> close on Friday. Since I'm about to leave on vacation can Antoine or
> Jacques run the vote for this one?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:07
I started a vote for the other Flight discussion thread, which will
close on Friday. Since I'm about to leave on vacation can Antoine or
Jacques run the vote for this one?
Thanks
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:07 AM David Li wrote:
>
> Agreed with Antoine on grpc+tcp as the default. A gRPC server
> ge
Agreed with Antoine on grpc+tcp as the default. A gRPC server
generally won't offer both encrypted and unencrypted connections, so
this won't establish an insecure session where a secure one is
available. We could implement a TLS upgrade mechanism later as well.
I've updated the document to match.
Le 02/04/2019 à 01:28, Jacques Nadeau a écrit :
> My thinking is ideally the protocol would be more opaque than engineer-y in
> that an upgrade would happen as part of the negotiation process. For
> example, when a connection is made, client says "hey, I also support these
> things" and then serv
My thinking is ideally the protocol would be more opaque than engineer-y in
that an upgrade would happen as part of the negotiation process. For
example, when a connection is made, client says "hey, I also support these
things" and then server responds and says "hey, let's send data on this
channel
I would like to propose a vote on this feature this week. I'll wait
another day or so before starting the vote
On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 4:14 PM David Li wrote:
>
> Hey Wes,
>
> Thanks for the comments. I've updated the doc a bit to reflect some
> options for supporting "hybrid" transports.
>
> Bes
Hey Wes,
Thanks for the comments. I've updated the doc a bit to reflect some
options for supporting "hybrid" transports.
Best,
David
On 3/29/19, Wes McKinney wrote:
> hi David,
>
> This seems like a reasonable evolution from where we are now. I will
> defer to others to comment on the low-level
hi David,
This seems like a reasonable evolution from where we are now. I will
defer to others to comment on the low-level details
This is sort of scope and kind of a can of worms, but one area where
we should invest some thought is alternative FlightData transports,
while allowing the "command l
