> On Feb 5, 2015, at 3:44 AM, Michael Welzl <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 05 Feb 2015, at 00:29, Marie-Jose Montpetit <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> snip/snip
>> 
>>> In summary, we need a better way to describe the services we want before 
>>> we'll ever be able to expect the transport to handle them properly.
>>> 
>> I totally agree.
> 
> We've been around the "let's specify what the application wants, not what 
> protocols can do" block a couple of times prior to creation of this group. We 
> started and ended with the bottom-up'ish plan that is in the charter now.

Yes but in fact I think that you have to look at both ends: define what the 
service wants can be tricky but necessary. On the other hand it also almost 
implies that the mechanims or services also expose their characteristics - if 
not, matching of services to transport cannot happen.
> 
> So, if you take a look at item #2 in the charter, it's rather unclear what 
> that item is going to look like, and in particular how we'll arrive there:
> 
> "2) Specify the subset of those Transport Services, as identified 
> in item 1, that end systems supporting TAPS will provide, and 
> give guidance on choosing among available mechanisms and 
> protocols. Note that not all the capabilities of IETF Transport 
> protocols need to be exposed as Transport Services."
> 
> We'll have to figure out reasonable ways to shorten the list in item #1 at 
> some point; this could include compiling a number of services under more 
> application-oriented terms - such as "willing to choose low latency at the 
> cost of X". What this statement precisely means depends on "X", and I think 
> we can get an idea of what "X" is when we create that service from the list 
> in item #1, not out of the blue.
> 
> Does that make sense?
Yes but the issue will be in defining X - less latency at the expense of 
bandwidth or more complexity in the network or ??? Each of those may imply a 
different transport. 
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Taps mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps

Reply via email to