IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Taps] New Version Notification for draft-welzl-taps-transports-00.txt

Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> Wed, 07 October 2015 07:17 UTC

Return-Path: <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
X-Original-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDACC1A0367 for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:17:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 gQKt7eOood-i for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:17:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out4.uio.no (mail-out4.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:10::15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC53E1A0363 for <taps@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 00:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-mx1.uio.no ([129.240.10.29]) by mail-out4.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1Zjiz1-0007Ph-AQ; Wed, 07 Oct 2015 09:17:51 +0200
Received: from boomerang.ifi.uio.no ([129.240.68.135]) by mail-mx1.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) user michawe (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1Zjiz0-0005Td-Rt; Wed, 07 Oct 2015 09:17:51 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: <CAD62q9VXwMw3-rU9YaWvyU=1EV6giEm6C8k4Vb+iwTs_oevFWg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 09:17:49 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4656A4F1-8A56-424C-95A7-506D5FEE3FC3@ifi.uio.no>
References: <20150921083533.19273.62189.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <C5DCD4E3-C795-4C21-AA17-D59CA7F02D17@ifi.uio.no> <1D77A9B2-C37B-4ACF-A90D-DB485BC79B28@mjmontpetit.com> <92f091c456879303283af39e26ea14d5.squirrel@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <435C039A-5B01-450B-9223-883194F0B94D@mjmontpetit.com> <BCE21679-705E-4B51-B946-95D80A7EAE1A@ifi.uio.no> <CAD62q9VXwMw3-rU9YaWvyU=1EV6giEm6C8k4Vb+iwTs_oevFWg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-UiO-SPF-Received:
X-UiO-Ratelimit-Test: rcpts/h 9 msgs/h 3 sum rcpts/h 9 sum msgs/h 3 total rcpts 33809 max rcpts/h 54 ratelimit 0
X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO)
X-UiO-Scanned: FF51902886D6D13FD6DB08DFD5C1D307081B8094
X-UiO-SPAM-Test: remote_host: 129.240.68.135 spam_score: -49 maxlevel 80 minaction 2 bait 0 mail/h: 3 total 8102 max/h 17 blacklist 0 greylist 0 ratelimit 0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/RrIgP3g4AI6TWIh4dmmoY08WAik>
Cc: "<gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Fairhurst" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com>, "taps@ietf.org" <taps@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Taps] New Version Notification for draft-welzl-taps-transports-00.txt
X-BeenThere: taps@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:17:56 -0000

Hi,


> On 05 Oct 2015, at 20:42, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Have others read this draft yet?   It is clearly aimed at addressing charter deliverable #1.  Do other folks have an opinion on how well it helps the group achieve the goals in our charter?  Should we use this document in some way? I'm looking for more input from the working group on how we should proceed. 
> 
> My opinion: I am very mindful (& appreciative) of the significant effort by Mirja and Brian and the other contributors on draft-ietf-taps-transports.

+1


>    The discussion around this doc has been very useful for clarifying (to me) how difficult it can be to pull useful common abstractions out of the 30+ years of transport technologies.  Having been down this path for over a year, I appreciate the fairly narrow approach draft-welzl-taps-transports and think it may be the best chance for TAPS to succeed.  
> 
> Please share your views.

You say you appreciate the "fairly narrow" approach of draft-welzl-taps-transports. This makes me wonder - maybe draft-welzl-taps-transports should only cover a subset of the transports in draft-ietf-taps-transports, based on what we can see in draft-ietf-taps-transports?   (e.g. the eventual text on RTP in draft-ietf-taps-transports will probably not be a short list of features, which may indicate that RTP should not be included in draft-welzl-taps-transports).

Cheers,
Michael

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email