IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Taps] Prague agenda planning

"Brian Trammell (IETF)" <ietf@trammell.ch> Thu, 29 June 2017 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@trammell.ch>
X-Original-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD649126CF6 for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 09:07:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Z8nUY1o8JUEH for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 09:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from capri.iway.ch (capri.iway.ch [IPv6:2001:8e0:40:325::45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D3F2129B36 for <taps@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 09:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gozo.iway.ch (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95965340EE2; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:07:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ACF/18338.25609); Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:07:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from switchplus-mail.ch (switchplus-mail.ch [212.25.8.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gozo.iway.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:07:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from nb-10604.ethz.ch (account ietf@trammell.ch [82.130.102.91] verified) by switchplus-mail.ch (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.14) with ESMTPSA id 22307508; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:07:22 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AA4B4C5B-B5A4-48CC-908A-443EB91C2B73"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail
From: "Brian Trammell (IETF)" <ietf@trammell.ch>
In-Reply-To: <3A3686B5-FF60-448E-9E13-4B493B472C6D@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:07:21 +0200
Cc: taps WG <taps@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <CEA46958-6620-4138-BA2F-B55D1F87674A@trammell.ch>
References: <C582EEC8-8762-4CB6-9CA3-4E5AF92C5A68@gmail.com> <3A3686B5-FF60-448E-9E13-4B493B472C6D@gmail.com>
To: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/549eH7WGlKmSsDXtAQhfCuCfaLE>
Subject: Re: [Taps] Prague agenda planning
X-BeenThere: taps@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on Transport Services <taps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/taps>, <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/taps/>
List-Post: <mailto:taps@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps>, <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:07:34 -0000

hi Aaron,

> On 29 Jun 2017, at 17:36, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Updating. Our agenda time is much more productive if we can home in on specific questions to discuss rather than just give document overviews. Authors & other folk: what’s interesting, unclear, or controversial here?

I think it's time to level up and have a discussion about "policy" and how it relates to TAPS.

I'm going to leave the definition of "policy" here deliberately vague with the hope that we can start to build some terminology around it at the meeting.

> 
> 	• draft-gjessing-taps-minset-05.txt
> 
> 		• There’s been some interesting discussion on the draft. Are there any specific topics we should set aside time to discuss?
> 	• Socket Intents, Philipp
> 
> 		• Again, what specific topics should we discuss?
> 		• We’ve been told to expect 3 drafts: on general concepts, BSD implementation, & communication granularity. What’s worth discussing?

Given the focus of the socket intents and granularity work, I think starting the policy discussion here makes sense.

> 	• Michio Honda HotNets paper “PASTE: Network Stacks Must Integrate with NVMM Abstractions”
> 
> 		• “These days I'm working on networking interface for non-volatile main memory (a.k.a. persistent memory and storage-class memory), because with such devices networking stack/API becomes a bottleneck in the end-to-end communication that involves persistent media (disk or SSDs for now). I saw some post-socket discussion in the minutes of the last meeting, so I wonder if this type of work could give some useful information to IETFers who design new transport API standards.”
> 		• Is there interest in this topic? AFAIK, there’s no Internet Draft. I will inquire whether Michio intends to submit one.

IMO this is very interesting stuff. Might be better as a tsvarea presentation?

Cheers,

Brian

> 	• Transport Security Protocol Survey, Tommy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> Taps@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email