I can do the issue scrub for -interface.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 5 Nov 2019, at 00:09, Aaron Falk <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Draft agenda based on what I’ve heard. Putting the security draft last as I’m 
> uncertain at this point whether the discussion will converge. Also, rather 
> than Philipp’s list of topics, I suggest someone should scrub the open 
> issues. Who should drive the discussion? Other comments?
> 
> Administrivia (10m) - Chairs
> Issue review for (50m)
> draft-ietf-taps-architecture-05
> draft-ietf-taps-interface-05
> draft-ietf-taps-implementation-05
> IETF last call comments on draft-ietf-taps-security-09 (30m)
> Ref [from Ekr] [from Christian]
> What are our next steps?
> --aaron
> 
> On 4 Nov 2019, at 16:26, Brian Trammell (IETF) wrote:
> 
> hi Philipp, all,
> 
> parachuting-into-the-thread comments inline below.
> 
> On 4 Nov 2019, at 21:36, Philipp S. Tiesel <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> AVE!
> Philipp S. Tiesel
> 
> --
> Philipp S. Tiesel
> https://philipp.tiesel.net/
> 
> On 4. Nov 2019, at 19:18, Kyle Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Evidently, the transport security document.
> 
> Yes, we need to discuss next steps there. I still hope there will be some 
> discussion
> on the list this and next week so we do not need to spend too much precious 
> face time
> with this issue.
> 
> I also see the state of the three other documents as agenda Items:
> - Architecture
> - Should be nearly finished, but for those you have not read one of the last 
> two versions,
> please do so and give feedback!
> 
> IIRC we'd said we wanted to hold this until at least interface was done. But 
> yes, please read this :) (I should re-read, actually).
> 
> - Interface
> 
> I think you've identified the three pending discussions correctly on this 
> doc...
> 
> - Framers
> 
> I need to dig into this a bit (and hope to before Singapore, but I also hoped 
> to have cycles before the interim that didn't happen so MMMV) but I'm a lot 
> happier with the general arrangement in -05 with the bulk of the framer 
> detail in -impl.
> 
> - Errors
> 
> I continue to think that something along the lines of the present 
> underspecification is not wrong here. But we should probably have more text 
> about the shape of that underspecification.
> 
> - Multicast
> 
> ...continues to be the swamp into which all transport efforts wade and 
> subsequently get eaten by rodents of unusual size. :)
> 
> Practically speaking, this boils down to two issues AFAICT:
> 
> - We have https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/303 on multicast 
> transport properties. This is marked Ready For Text and assigned to tfpauly, 
> so I'm inclined to let Tommy write some text here (or assign someone else if 
> they'd like to take a crack at it).
> 
> - We have https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/150 which has a 
> long and varied history which you should go read if you're not familiar with 
> it (or if, like me, you'd forgotten it):
> 
> - dup'd to https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/170, which was 
> closed by PR on 6 Jun 2018
> - reopened to explictly address multicast interaction, languished without 
> discussion for six months
> - tagged ready for text in January with an assigned volunteer (Jake) but no 
> discussion or guidance otherwise
> 
> I propose we come to a decision on this in Singapore: commit to text soon 
> (end 2019) or ship without.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Brian
> 
> - Implementation
> - Are we satisfied with the structure
> - Proxies/Tor/etc…
> - Multicast
> 
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 8:33 AM Aaron Falk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ok, gang, what should we discuss in Singapore?
> 
> --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

Reply via email to