Re: Call for volunteers for C/C++ API liaison manager

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Thu, 01 May 2014 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E9591A6F74; Thu, 1 May 2014 08:02:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F5xExK2JcUcz; Thu, 1 May 2014 08:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu (darkstar.isi.edu [128.9.128.127]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 562121A6F7D; Thu, 1 May 2014 08:02:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.93] (pool-71-105-87-112.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.105.87.112]) (authenticated bits=0) by darkstar.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s41F27Fm021465 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 1 May 2014 08:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <536261F0.1070004@isi.edu>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 08:02:08 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
Subject: Re: Call for volunteers for C/C++ API liaison manager
References: <EB423B81-41F2-480D-B1EE-80E1753E1CDB@iab.org> <53618BDD.1080900@isi.edu> <368E668C-E60A-4D65-B3C6-F3CFCB66EBA7@lucidvision.com>
In-Reply-To: <368E668C-E60A-4D65-B3C6-F3CFCB66EBA7@lucidvision.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/XOOGLBMGwqIqwnIijVM3S8enkU8
Cc: IAB <iab@iab.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, IETF Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 15:02:56 -0000

On 5/1/2014 5:12 AM, Thomas Nadeau wrote:
>
> 	APIs are not that useful unless there is code behind them.

Ultimately, yes. But the code represents an instance of the API.

The "application" layer actions in RFC793 - SEND, RECEIVE, CONNECT, 
LISTEN - are *not* the same as the Unix socket API; Unix sockets are one 
implementation of that interface.

 > Are you proposing code that goes with those APIs?

Yes, just as I would propose code that implements a protocol. But I 
don't think either one is useful in the IETF except as an example - 
definitely never as a specification.

> Also the language that you do this in is important depending on the
> area of applicability.

Just as much (or little) as the physical layer (802.11, ethernet, 
carrier pigeon) is important to IP.

 > For instance, if these APIs are related to modern
> applications, C is all but useless because its not used to build most of
> those; you need Java/python/etc... for these cases.

If you don't have C, you often don't have scripted languages that are 
(often) compiled from C source code.

However, that depends on your compiler and the environment in which you 
develop your languages. That's important for language developers, but 
not the IETF (any more than we spec how to build pigeon coops).

Joe