Closed dbluhm closed 2 years ago
Fair question. For the 1.0 version of this protocol, the message type name used is ping_response
. I am not aware of any 2.0 implementations yet, personally. That being said, the snake casing of this message type name has always been an odd one out and I'd strongly advocate for switching to kebab case with a 2.0 version of this protocol, even if there's an implementation or two already out there.
Also worth pointing out that the example message given a few lines after the changes made in this PR shows ping-response
. Whichever way we go, we'll have to make a correction to be internally consistent.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Bluhm dbluhm@pm.me