What are you trying to achieve?
Rename these remaining net.* attributes (the ones not covered in #3199) to align with ECS:
net.protocol.name -> network.protocol.name
net.protocol.version -> network.protocol.version
net.sock.family -> network.type
net.transport -> network.transport
Unlike the other ECS alignment proposals where we see benefits to the ECS modeling/naming, there's not really any good argument why OTel or ECS attributes are better here.
And so the question remains whether we should align going foward with the existing OpenTelemetry attributes or align with the existing ECS attributes.
What are you trying to achieve?
Rename these remaining
net.*attributes (the ones not covered in #3199) to align with ECS:net.protocol.name->network.protocol.namenet.protocol.version->network.protocol.versionnet.sock.family->network.typenet.transport->network.transportUnlike the other ECS alignment proposals where we see benefits to the ECS modeling/naming, there's not really any good argument why OTel or ECS attributes are better here.
And so the question remains whether we should align going foward with the existing OpenTelemetry attributes or align with the existing ECS attributes.