Hi, Aaron, On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Aaron Falk <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, Aaron and Gorry, >> >> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Aaron Falk <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Couple of minor comments on the draft >>> <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fairhurst-taps-transports-usage-udp-01> >>> : >>> >>> - No mention of ECN in phase 2. Am I missing something? >>> - You had asked about what app-oriented IETF groups might be able to >>> review the API. It's a good question for >>> draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage >>> as well. Wonder if the wg has any suggestions? Perhaps we should raise >>> the question in APPSAWG although they don't seem to be meeting this >>> IETF... >>> >>> >> If you can corner Mary Barnes, Cullen Jennings, or Murray Kucherawy at >> the welcome reception, you might ask if Dispatch is the right place to ask >> about these drafts - now that APP is part of ART, Dispatch has a broader >> scope than just RAI, and they are meeting this time (on Monday morning, so >> ask fast) ... >> >> Spencer >> > > > So, is DISPATCH the new APPSAWG? If so, we need to add it to our conflict > avoid list (esp since we conflict with it this week). > > --aaron > I'm not entirely clear on that, but I think it's kinda turning into the ART Open Area Meeting (APPSAWG actually works on stuff that doesn't have its own working group, like TSVWG). So, DISPATCH is more like TSVAREA than TSVWG. In related news, I just talked to Cullen, and he said Dispatch puts up advertisements for drafts all the time. Is all you/Gorry want to do is get a slide into the chair slide deck that says "these drafts in TSV could use ART clue and attention", that should be fine (but putting together a slide that says whatever you want to ask is the key action). I hope that helps, Spencer
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
