… and the latest version of the minset draft excludes security from the final minset, mentioning that this will be addressed in a separate draft (which should be this one).
Cheers, Michael > On Jun 27, 2017, at 11:33 PM, Tommy Pauly <tpa...@apple.com> wrote: > > Yes, we’d like to add this as a WG item once published. This is based on the > conversation had at the meeting in Chicago about wanting a draft to include > Security protocols for TAPS API considerations. > > Thanks, > Tommy > >> On Jun 27, 2017, at 1:44 PM, Aaron Falk <aaron.f...@gmail.com >> <mailto:aaron.f...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Cool. Are you proposing this as a wg item? >> >> --aaron >> >> On 27 Jun 2017, at 16:22, Tommy Pauly wrote: >> >> Hi Aaron, >> >> We have a draft we’ll be publishing in the next week that does a survey of >> Transport Security protocols, and the interfaces they expose to the >> transport layer as well as applications. We’d like to have a slot to discuss >> this topic with the WG. >> >> Thanks, >> Tommy >> >>> On Jun 27, 2017, at 12:21 PM, Aaron Falk <aaron.f...@gmail.com >>> <mailto:aaron.f...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Here the short list of topics recently raised for our next meeting and some >>> questions/comments. Please respond and suggest any other topics. >>> >>> draft-gjessing-taps-minset-05.txt >>> >>> There’s been some interesting discussion on the draft. Are there any >>> specific topics we should set aside time to discuss? >>> Socket Intents >>> >>> Again, what specific topics should we discuss? >>> We’ve been told to expect 3 drafts: on general concepts, BSD >>> implementation, & communication granularity. What’s worth discussing? >>> Michio Honda HotNets paper “PASTE: Network Stacks Must Integrate with NVMM >>> Abstractions >>> <http://www.ht.sfc.keio.ac.jp/%7Emicchie/papers/paste-hotnets16.pdf>” >>> >>> “These days I'm working on networking interface for non-volatile main >>> memory (a.k.a. persistent memory and storage-class memory), because with >>> such devices networking stack/API becomes a bottleneck in the end-to-end >>> communication that involves persistent media (disk or SSDs for now). I saw >>> some post-socket discussion in the minutes of the last meeting, so I wonder >>> if this type of work could give some useful information to IETFers who >>> design new transport API standards.” >>> Is there interest in this topic? AFAIK, there’s no Internet Draft. I will >>> inquire whether Michio intends to submit one. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Taps mailing list >>> Taps@ietf.org <mailto:Taps@ietf.org> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps >>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Taps mailing list >> Taps@ietf.org <mailto:Taps@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps > > _______________________________________________ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
