IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Taps] Prague agenda planning

Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> Thu, 29 June 2017 20:53 UTC

Return-Path: <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
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 90DD712EA53 for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 13:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, 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 Cl-SbAUE_gsH for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 13:53:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out02.uio.no (mail-out02.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:8210::71]) (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 59E76129AD5 for <taps@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 13:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-mx02.uio.no ([129.240.10.43]) by mail-out02.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1dQgQz-0009as-D0; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:53:05 +0200
Received: from 234.133.189.109.customer.cdi.no ([109.189.133.234] helo=[192.168.1.8]) by mail-mx02.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) user michawe (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1dQgQy-00047K-Nn; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:53:05 +0200
From: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Message-Id: <0E3F9805-5513-40F8-ADB2-D5F550EC771A@ifi.uio.no>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4F368019-A280-4A33-8BFA-F90CAD44D113"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:53:09 +0200
In-Reply-To: <77C2BA95-F95B-4597-9159-7D5FC4068860@gmail.com>
Cc: "taps@ietf.org" <taps@ietf.org>
To: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
References: <C582EEC8-8762-4CB6-9CA3-4E5AF92C5A68@gmail.com> <3A3686B5-FF60-448E-9E13-4B493B472C6D@gmail.com> <77C2BA95-F95B-4597-9159-7D5FC4068860@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx02.uio.no: 109.189.133.234 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ifi.uio.no) client-ip=109.189.133.234; envelope-from=michawe@ifi.uio.no; helo=[192.168.1.8];
X-UiO-Ratelimit-Test: rcpts/h 4 msgs/h 3 sum rcpts/h 4 sum msgs/h 3 total rcpts 56034 max rcpts/h 54 ratelimit 0
X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-4.9, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, AWL=0.055, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, TVD_RCVD_IP=0.001, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO)
X-UiO-Scanned: F2D2F9E1F748BB9DCC36A106DE4D51D4F349F883
X-UiO-SPAM-Test: remote_host: 109.189.133.234 spam_score: -48 maxlevel 80 minaction 2 bait 0 mail/h: 3 total 1655 max/h 13 blacklist 0 greylist 0 ratelimit 0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/bIgeD-g5n-GnxwVyeTbX00uvA2Y>
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 20:53:11 -0000

Hi,

In line:


> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:53 PM, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Updated:
> 
> 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?

I appreciated this discussion much, but personally I don’t think know of any specific topic that we need to discuss here - plus, there seem to be plenty of other good things to talk about which will all need time.

Cheers,
Michael

> 
> Transport Security Protocol Survey, Tommy
> 
> The common features/interface presented by various security protocols
> The ability to separate security handshakes from data encryption
> Socket Intents, Concepts & Communication Granularity, Phillipp
> 
> Application- & System-Specified Policy & TAPS, Brian? Tommy?
> 
> Michio Honda HotNets paper “PASTE: Network Stacks Must Integrate with NVMM Abstractions <http://www.ht.sfc.keio.ac.jp/%7Emicchie/papers/paste-hotnets16.pdf>”
> “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. May end up in TSVAREA
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> Taps@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email