> On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael Welzl <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Thanks for this update! > > A question: > >> We've posted a -01 rev of the TAPS transports document. We believe that the >> format and level of detail for the TCP section is about what we're targeting >> for each of the other sections, but this is still open to discussion. > > Why is Nagle not a part of the protocol components and interface description? > It’s mentioned in the protocol description above, and it’s something that an > application decides.
Simple omission. Should we make an attempt to give this (as a component) a generic name? "Selectable sender side buffering"? Or can we just call it simply "Nagle"? Thanks, cheers, Brian > Cheers, > Michael > > _______________________________________________ > Taps mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
