Hi,

I almost agree  :-)    I agree that there should be several documents, along 
the lines of what you write - but I do think there should be only one API…

Cheers,
Michael

 
> On Nov 5, 2017, at 9:44 PM, Tommy Pauly <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> One quick thought on this: I think that the charter item 3 (the recommended 
> mechanisms for deploying a TAPS system) can and should certainly include 
> multiple documents. These documents we'll be talking about are in no way 
> mutually exclusive, so I don't think we should be thinking of it as "hear all 
> three and choose one of them". We may well want to adopt all of them, or some 
> other combination of documents, to cover item 3. Specifically, from the 
> charter item, we see that the idea is plural: "Specify experimental support 
> mechanisms ...".
> 
> One proposal for approaching the charter item is to ultimately have documents 
> like this:
> - A top-level API document (like post sockets, as informed by the specific 
> implementation example that Gorry gives in the NEAT document)
> - A document on application preferences interacting with system policy (like 
> the socket intents draft)
> - A document on racing connection establishment (like 
> draft-pauly-taps-guidelines-01 + draft-grinnemo-taps-he-03)
> 
> These different aspects don't necessarily make sense to combine, and have 
> different audiences for implementers.
> 
> The agenda order could be modified, but since there doesn't need to be any 
> mutual exclusivity between the items, the current order should be fine too.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tommy
> 
>> On Nov 5, 2017, at 12:49 AM, Michael Welzl <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> It seems to me that this charter contains three items that relate to the API:
>> 1) draft-trammell-taps-post-sockets-03
>> 2) draft-tiesel-taps-socketintents-01
>> 3) draft-fairhurst-taps-neat-00
>> 
>> ...which are currently charter items 3, 4 and 6 (an unrelated - no less 
>> important! because it describes the implementation! - item takes position 
>> 5). Moreover, for the first one, it says "expected adoption call targeting 
>> charter item 3”.
>> 
>> I think it would make more sense to first hear all three proposals and then 
>> discuss the possible adoption of one of them?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Michael
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 4, 2017, at 11:14 PM, Zaheduzzaman Sarker 
>>> <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello WG,
>>>  
>>> The agenda for IETF100 has been uploaded 
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/agenda-100-taps/ 
>>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/agenda-100-taps/>
>>>  
>>> Any comments?
>>>  
>>> BR
>>>  
>>> Zahed
>>>  
>>> ===============================================================================
>>> ANM ZAHEDUZZAMAN SARKER 
>>> Ericsson Research
>>> 
>>> Ericsson
>>> Laboratoriegränd 11
>>> 97128 Luleå, Sweden
>>> Phone +46 10 717 37 43
>>> Mobile +46 76 115 37 43
>>> Office +46 76 115 37 43
>>> Fax +46 920 996 21
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> www.ericsson.com <http://www.ericsson.com/>
>>> ===============================================================================
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taps mailing list
>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps 
>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taps mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
> 

_______________________________________________
Taps mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps

Reply via email to