IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Taps] Prague agenda planning

Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> Thu, 29 June 2017 21:09 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 739E712EAEE for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 14:09:54 -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 ySjDH2YsVx9v for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 14:09:52 -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 6C512129AD5 for <taps@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 14:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-mx01.uio.no ([129.240.10.26]) by mail-out02.uio.no with esmtp (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1dQghC-000AiO-Rn for taps@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 23:09:50 +0200
Received: from 234.133.189.109.customer.cdi.no ([109.189.133.234] helo=[192.168.1.8]) by mail-mx01.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 1dQghB-0008Tb-Su for taps@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2017 23:09:50 +0200
From: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6593CF00-F073-4FE2-B52E-142D962E8147"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 23:09:54 +0200
References: <C582EEC8-8762-4CB6-9CA3-4E5AF92C5A68@gmail.com> <3A3686B5-FF60-448E-9E13-4B493B472C6D@gmail.com> <CEA46958-6620-4138-BA2F-B55D1F87674A@trammell.ch> <EDC3DBF5-8463-42AD-BB31-D8EE93CB0BB5@apple.com>
To: "taps@ietf.org" <taps@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <EDC3DBF5-8463-42AD-BB31-D8EE93CB0BB5@apple.com>
Message-Id: <3EC0F8DD-93C9-4551-AF49-BB440D17A68A@ifi.uio.no>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx01.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 2 msgs/h 2 sum rcpts/h 4 sum msgs/h 3 total rcpts 56036 max rcpts/h 54 ratelimit 0
X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-4.9, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, AWL=0.054, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, TVD_RCVD_IP=0.001, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO)
X-UiO-Scanned: 6CB555ADD196BF1DCC50C9B92CDB2CC8625D0135
X-UiO-SPAM-Test: remote_host: 109.189.133.234 spam_score: -48 maxlevel 80 minaction 2 bait 0 mail/h: 2 total 1657 max/h 13 blacklist 0 greylist 0 ratelimit 0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/cKRGNMoJxg96OLujYD_FigVgMmg>
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 21:09:54 -0000

Hi all,


> On Jun 29, 2017, at 7:09 PM, Tommy Pauly <tpauly@apple.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 9:07 AM, Brian Trammell (IETF) <ietf@trammell.ch> wrote:
>> 
>> 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.
> 
> +1 to having a general discussion on the topic of policy (both application-specified and system-specified), likely following onto the presentation of intents. Getting a formal set of definitions would really help moving forward in our discussions.

+1 from me too.

BTW, NEAT already has quite an elaborate policy system built in. Naeem gave a high-level look at it at the last meeting:
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/slides/slides-98-taps-42-neat-naeem-khademi-00.pdf <https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/slides/slides-98-taps-42-neat-naeem-khademi-00.pdf>  (slides 6/7)

More details are here:
https://www.neat-project.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/commag16-accepted-version.pdf <https://www.neat-project.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/commag16-accepted-version.pdf>
This says “until published”, but I think this has just happened:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7945852/ <http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7945852/>

Cheers,
Michael

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email