Hi Folks- So, we have these two docs and a rough agreement that they are complimentary. Gorry suggests that they both progress as responsive to milestone 1:
I suggest the two docs against the first milestone will help us make progress towards the next milestone faster. (Assuming we can keep the two aligned, which seems quite doable). I can see also how the docs are useful to different people. I'd like to see both mature and provide inputs to move forward. Is there agreement on this? I’ve heard no objections. Assuming so, we should move on. First, I would ask that the authors summarize the work remaining on each doc to the list and call out any topics requiring discussion at the Yokohama meeting. Second, let’s hear some proposals for addressing the second milestone. 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.
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
