Hi Iain, On 8/21/19 4:28 AM, Iain Sharp wrote: > Yes, I would be interested if someone can explain the relationship between > Posix and IETF in this regard, and why the information appears in two places. > It is something that is unclear to me. >
It is a bit of a convoluted relationship. Generally, POSIX deals with defining the APIs for UNIX OSes. Part of that involves defining the APIs related to networking (e.g., socket(), getaddrinfo(), ...). The IETF has published a number of "API" RFCs that describe enhancements that the IETF community would like to see in the POSIX suite of APIs. Once the IETF has agreed to those enhancements and published an RFC, the advocates for those APIs then engage with the OpenGroup to try and get them to take up the standardization of those new/updated APIs. In some cases, they do and in others, they don't. The advanced socket API for IPv6 is a good example of the latter. I view any API defined by the IETF as an "informational" request to the OpenGroup to standardize an API with the documented capabilities. What I don't understand is why the IETF does not have a liaison relationship with the OpenGroup to facilitate the development of the appropriate APIs for the technologies defined in the IETF. That is a question better suited for someone on the IAB. Not sure if that clarifies things or not... Regards, Brian
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
