Re: [Taps] IETF100 meeting agenda uploaded

[Tommy Pauly <[e-mail]>]

Indeed! But, as far as I can tell, drafts like draft-tiesel-taps-socketintents-01 are not trying to propose a top-level API, but rather an aspect of the API.

Even when we discuss the draft for what I'm referring to as the "top-level API", I think we need to (in the spirit of the charter) not be specifying a specific set of language-specific API calls, or a specific framework, but the shape that instances of an API should take. My goal coming out of TAPS would be to change the approach implementers take when designing transport APIs, to make sure that the resulting APIs not only support the flexibility TAPS was designed for, but also can be standard and cross-compatible across all operating systems. Thus, we want the documents to encompass API principles and concepts, but leave the semantics flexible and as an exercise to the reader. Perhaps in the examples, even give several options in different language styles, and show how code can be easily translated between the approaches.

To be specific, I would imagine that whatever API examples we have in the various documents we write will not necessarily be part of any specific implementation. Rather, various implementations will conform to the principles and patterns of the API description. Apple's transport APIs would match it, NEAT's APIs would match it, Android APIs would match it, Windows APIs would match it, etc, etc.

Thanks,
Tommy

> On Nov 5, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Michael Welzl <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I almost agree  :-)    I agree that there should be several documents, along the lines of what you write - but I do think there should be only one API…
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
> 
>  
>> On Nov 5, 2017, at 9:44 PM, Tommy Pauly <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> 
>> One quick thought on this: I think that the charter item 3 (the recommended mechanisms for deploying a TAPS system) can and should certainly include multiple documents. These documents we'll be talking about are in no way mutually exclusive, so I don't think we should be thinking of it as "hear all three and choose one of them". We may well want to adopt all of them, or some other combination of documents, to cover item 3. Specifically, from the charter item, we see that the idea is plural: "Specify experimental support mechanisms ...".
>> 
>> One proposal for approaching the charter item is to ultimately have documents like this:
>> - A top-level API document (like post sockets, as informed by the specific implementation example that Gorry gives in the NEAT document)
>> - A document on application preferences interacting with system policy (like the socket intents draft)
>> - A document on racing connection establishment (like draft-pauly-taps-guidelines-01 + draft-grinnemo-taps-he-03)
>> 
>> These different aspects don't necessarily make sense to combine, and have different audiences for implementers.
>> 
>> The agenda order could be modified, but since there doesn't need to be any mutual exclusivity between the items, the current order should be fine too.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Tommy
>> 
>>> On Nov 5, 2017, at 12:49 AM, Michael Welzl <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> It seems to me that this charter contains three items that relate to the API:
>>> 1) draft-trammell-taps-post-sockets-03
>>> 2) draft-tiesel-taps-socketintents-01
>>> 3) draft-fairhurst-taps-neat-00
>>> 
>>> ...which are currently charter items 3, 4 and 6 (an unrelated - no less important! because it describes the implementation! - item takes position 5). Moreover, for the first one, it says "expected adoption call targeting charter item 3”.
>>> 
>>> I think it would make more sense to first hear all three proposals and then discuss the possible adoption of one of them?
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Michael
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Nov 4, 2017, at 11:14 PM, Zaheduzzaman Sarker <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello WG,
>>>>  
>>>> The agenda for IETF100 has been uploaded https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/agenda-100-taps/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/100/materials/agenda-100-taps/>
>>>>  
>>>> Any comments?
>>>>  
>>>> BR
>>>>  
>>>> Zahed
>>>>  
>>>> ===============================================================================
>>>> ANM ZAHEDUZZAMAN SARKER 
>>>> Ericsson Research
>>>> 
>>>> Ericsson
>>>> Laboratoriegränd 11
>>>> 97128 Luleå, Sweden
>>>> Phone [phone]
>>>> Mobile [phone]
>>>> Office [phone]
>>>> Fax [phone]
>>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>> www.ericsson.com <http://www.ericsson.com/>
>>>> ===============================================================================
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Taps mailing list
>>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taps mailing list
>>> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps>
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps