On Aug 2, 2012, at 2:01 AM, <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Full specification of a Connection manager is out of the IETF scope, but it is expected from the MIF API to provide information and functionalities that a connection manager may need. On the other hand, I think that ongoing work in MIF ( implementation guideline or specification of the high-level API) may provide guidance on how a connection manager should use the MIF API .
In fact, the current work on the MIF API is assuming that the connection manager may use, and indeed _require_ features of the operating system which are not exposed in the MIF API. The reason for this division is that it's expected that the vendor of a device or operating system will almost certainly have a single connection manager that controls the connections of the machine, and that there is no way to anticipate the context in which this connection manager will operate. So its deliverables are fairly clear, but its requirements are clear as mud. If this is not in fact the consensus of the working group, then people who know more about how connection managers work (if there are any who can participate) should be proposing additional API messages. For my part, I think that we have a pretty clear and manageable job to do if we just solve the problem of providing the minimal functionality that a high-level API or smart application would need.
_______________________________________________ mif mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
