Dear Aaron, Thanks a lot for your comments!
In line: > On Jun 19, 2017, at 8:20 PM, Aaron Falk <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMO, the doc looks good and should be published. See below for a couple of > comments that should be addressed before submission for AD review. > > For both docs, the introduction (plus the appendix) does a good job of > talking about ‘what’ is in the doc but the > draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-05.txt excerpt below is the only statement > of ‘why’ and I think it is insufficient. As a courtesy to the reader, a short > summary of how this fits into the TAPS design process would be helpful. > Specifically, I think we need to say that this document captures an > intermediate stage of the design process, a snapshot in time analysis of the > IETF transport protocols, and is being published as an RFC to document the > authors’ & working group’s analysis generating a set of transport > abstractions that can be exported in the TAPS API. (You’ll probably be able > to phrase it better. :) > Done in the intro, and also added a sentence to the abstract. > The list of primitives, events and transport features in this > document is strictly based on the parts of protocol specifications > that describe what the protocol provides to an application using it > and how the application interacts with it. Together with an overview > of the services provided by IETF transport protocols and congestion > > Welzl, et al. Expires November 25, 2017 [Page 3] > > Internet-Draft Transport Services May 2017 > > control mechanisms [RFC8095] and an analysis of UDP and UDP-Lite > [FJ16], it provides the basis for the minimal set of transport > services that end systems should support > [I-D.draft-gjessing-taps-minset]. > > Regarding the above, we probably want to say “end systems supporting TAPS > should implement” or something. Saying end systems “should support” this set > of services is a strong statement and we probably shouldn’t say it. > Absolutely agree, indeed I didn’t mean to recommend that all the world’s end systems be changed (though I’d love that ;-) ). Fixed. > Probably also want draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage to point to > draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp in the introduction so it’s clear to the > reader that these are a set. > Agree, done (I think I did already but now the citation is in a more obvious position I think) Cheers, Michael > —aaron > > On 29 May 2017, at 12:30, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Dear TAPS working group: > > The authors have indicated the two drafts below are complete and are ready > for a final working group review. WGLC starts today and will be three weeks, > concluding June 19. Send comments, including an indication that the docs are > ready for publication, to the working group list. > > On the Usage of Transport Features Provided by IETF Transport Protocols > <https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-05.txt> > Features of the User Datagram Protocol (UDP) and Lightweight UDP (UDP- Lite) > Transport Protocols > <https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp-03.txt> > —aaron > > _______________________________________________ > Taps mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
