I saw no comments on the 2nd last call. IMO, this is a minor change to the document. Are there any objections to moving forward with publication? I am open to requests for additional delay.
--aaron On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Aaron Falk <[email protected]> wrote: > As Brian highlights below, doc 1 has had a pretty thorough scrub and tidy > while incorporating last call comments. I think the number of changes is > sufficient that the group should take another look. Please send comments, > pro or con, to the list. > > --aaron > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Brian Trammell <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 9:39 AM > Subject: Fwd: New Version Notification for > draft-ietf-taps-transports-09.txt > To: Aaron Falk <[email protected]> > Cc: Mirja Kühlewind <[email protected]>, Gorry Fairhurst < > [email protected]> > > > Hi, Aaron, > > We went over the document over the past week addressing WGLC comments, and > also spent a good deal of time with a fine-tooth comb double-checking > editorial flow as well as the alignment of the per-protocol features with > those in the definitive feature list in section 5. As you can see from the > diff, the changes here (especially with respect to things we found that > were missing from the list in section 5) are not all entirely editorial, so > we may need to run a second WGLC on this. Chair's prerogative, of course, > but I wanted to make sure you knew we weren't trying to sneak one past you > here. :) If you believe one is not necessary, then this is very nearly > ready to go. > > In any case, we'd also like to slightly rearrange the transport protocol > sections in order to eliminate forward references, but we'd want to do that > after any second WGLC comments, since it'll make the diffs hard to follow. > > Thanks, cheers, > > Brian > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > From: [email protected] > > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-taps-transports-09.txt > > Date: 29 Jan 2016 15:32:13 CET > > To: "Mirja Kuehlewind" <[email protected]>, "Gorry > Fairhurst" <[email protected]>, "Brian Trammell" <[email protected]>, > "Godred Fairhurst" <[email protected]> > > > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-taps-transports-09.txt > > has been successfully submitted by Brian Trammell and posted to the > > IETF repository. > > > > Name: draft-ietf-taps-transports > > Revision: 09 > > Title: Services provided by IETF transport protocols and > congestion control mechanisms > > Document date: 2016-01-28 > > Group: taps > > Pages: 54 > > URL: > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-taps-transports-09.txt > > Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-taps-transports/ > > Htmlized: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-taps-transports-09 > > Diff: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-taps-transports-09 > > > > Abstract: > > This document describes, surveys, classifies and compares the > > protocol mechanisms provided by existing IETF protocols, as > > background for determining a common set of transport services. It > > examines the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), Multipath TCP, the > > Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), the User Datagram > > Protocol (UDP), UDP-Lite, the Datagram Congestion Control Protocol > > (DCCP), the Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP), the Realtime > > Transport Protocol (RTP), File Delivery over Unidirectional > > Transport/Asynchronous Layered Coding Reliable Multicast (FLUTE/ALC), > > and NACK-Oriented Reliable Multicast (NORM), Transport Layer Security > > (TLS), Datagram TLS (DTLS), and the Hypertext Transport Protocol > > (HTTP) when used as a pseudotransport. > > > > > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > The IETF Secretariat > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
