+1 to the reduction in time for the security survey. I think we ought to spend more time on the big three.
Best, Chris On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Tommy Pauly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mar 5, 2018, at 11:14 AM, Anna Brunstrom <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Zahed, Aaron, all, > > On 2018-03-01 15:54, Brian Trammell wrote: > > hi Zahed, Aaron, all, > >> On 27 Feb 2018, at 18:28, Tommy Pauly <[email protected]>; wrote: >> >> Hi Zahed & Aaron, >> >> We’ve posted the first of three new documents proposed for milestone 3, >> "An Architecture for Transport Services” (please go read it, everyone!): >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pauly-taps-arch >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pauly-taps-arch-00 >> >> The API and Implementation documents are forthcoming, and will be posted >> before the submission deadline. > > And now we have posted the second document (please go read it, everyone!): > > > Now also the Implementation document is posted (please have a look at that > one as well!): > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-brunstrom-taps-impl/ > > This document provides implementation guidance on how to build a system that > provides a Transport Services API as described in the API document. > > If we could have 10-15 minutes to also introduce implementation aspects > after the API presentation this would be great. Discussion for all three > documents go together. > > > + 1 to adding implementation to the list for the three new drafts. > > I think we can reduce the time for the transport security survey a bit to > make room! ~15 minutes for that. > > Best, > Tommy > > > Cheers, > Anna > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-trammell-taps-interface. > > The document combines concepts of the Post Sockets, NEAT, and Socket Intents > approaches to provide an interface to the architecture in the first document > at the level of a language-independent, abstract asynchronous interface > definition. > > We'd like 10-15 minutes after Tommy to build on the architecture and > introduce the concepts. ISTM (though I haven't discussed with Tommy, Anna, > and Micheal, the other editors) that the discussion time for these documents > can probably be combined. > > Cheers, > > Brian > >> I’d like a slot to go over the Architecture document and approach itself. >> A 15/20-minute talk with flexible discussion time would likely be good. I >> imagine we’d also want slots to discuss the API and Implementation documents >> to present them to the whole group as well. >> >> Thanks, >> Tommy >> >>> On Feb 27, 2018, at 1:13 AM, Zaheduzzaman Sarker >>> <[email protected]>; wrote: >>> >>> Hi TAPS, >>> >>> Your chairs are planning for the IETF 101 London Session. Please send >>> your proposal(s) for agenda item and also mention what points you would like >>> to discuss during the IETF101 meeting during your timeslot. >>> >>> BR >>> >>> Zahed & 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Taps mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps > > > > _______________________________________________ > Taps mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps > _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
