Re: [mif] Adoption of API document as the MIF WG document

Hi Simon,

2011/12/20, Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>:
> On 2011-12-19 11:24, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> On Dec 19, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Simon Perreault wrote:
>>> I just don't want the WG to see this document as something that allows us
>>> to
>>> place a "DONE" checkmark next to the API milestone. There is still API
>>> work to
>>> be done.
>>
>> Well, an easy fix for this is to add a milestone that addresses this
>> concern.
>
> I'd be happy with that. Something like...
>
>    3) MIF API: While no changes are needed for applications to run on
>    multiple interface hosts, a new API could provide additional services
>    to applications running on hosts attached to multiple provisioning
>    domains. For instance, these services could assist advanced
>    applications in having greater control over first-hop, source address
>    and/or DNS selection issues. This API will be defined as an abstract
>    interface specification, i.e., specific details about mapping to
>    operating system primitives or programming language will be left out.
>
>      3.1) Low-level API: This API will specify base functionality that a
>      platform needs to make available for the high-level API to be possible.
>      It is intended to be used by applications for most tasks: that will be
> the
>      high-level API's role. Applications could still call into the low-level
> API
>      to perform complex, infrequent tasks.
>
>      3.2) High-level API: This API will specify functionality intended for
>      applications' frequent tasks. The term "high-level" means that it will
>      abstract the tasks that need to be perform and minimize an
> application's
>      knowledge of a node's network configuration. It should be easy to use
> and
>      appropriate for most of tasks commonly performed by applications.
>
> If the charter was modified to something like the above then I'd change my
> position to "support"...

I am not sure what exactly the meaning of the "High-level API" here.
Since current API draft also "sepcify functionality intended for
applications's frequent tasks " and "abstract the tasks that need to
be perform" since we are not defining concrete API here.

regards,
Dapeng

> Simon
> --
> DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
> NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
> STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> mif@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
>

-- 

------
Best Regards,
Dapeng Liu