Right, I'd ask that we spend a good chunk of time discussing the security document. Since we have 90 minutes, perhaps allocate 20-30 minutes for that?
I've just posted the -05 versions of the three main documents. I'd suggest that we spend a good chunk of time going through the issues list, and figuring out what we expect to do when: (https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues?page=1&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen). We've made some strides in adding detail in the implementation draft, but that's still the one that needs most attention. Thanks, Tommy > On Nov 4, 2019, at 10:18 AM, Kyle Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > > Evidently, the transport security document. > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 8:33 AM Aaron Falk <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Ok, gang, what should we discuss in Singapore? > > --aaron > > _______________________________________________ > 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] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
