[Taps] IETF-93 agenda (v.0)

Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com> Thu, 16 July 2015 22:31 UTC

Return-Path: <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
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 8C4D41A9155 for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:31:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 LQ9ouuOqm3RV for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:30:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x232.google.com (mail-ie0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E61EB1A9163 for <taps@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iebmu5 with SMTP id mu5so65703260ieb.1 for <taps@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Q01XjvnX1GwBB2WsZ62ScEcNO51hlxFAR5vxrrJW6dY=; b=SW/D0A9JqHuoEQlm913baVJBlxPWqhDXqz8VAQsAyQ5Gue7tIA6X2n+RWG7thHEylS BVY4zv4WebLSNvsP2y9EmNq2WfN7Rs92DMYpzk/UfHenZjthaR+IApQjE1J5qsMWh5H3 EOKUgBtbyjMUlpctyw57Npf6HrBjnZYCuFQAy5AgwnTc4z5igUZyOIrL9GmMEJ+phrXu aaD2fr7vzgqIFzPrJqcvSOcoeT4ZczY5MA+yd2UsezYTJ7MtudOAoDvH9XbRmp6Ezu7Y ZZSdlQflATDAu799IWSiz0k04VAUUGsdIBqU+H83ToAXXWpDosUJr6VVovEi3j3HpCer Ejlw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.7.214 with SMTP id g83mr16284303ioi.28.1437085858431; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.59.225 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:30:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 18:30:58 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD62q9VXb78A=VkUF+DObkOXJhZd6sVJPsCdihNSFe-FXGNQDg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
To: "taps@ietf.org" <taps@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113f911c1a8a24051b05a030"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/mMbILwLj_S8MnZLgal2GH-2Xlz0>
Subject: [Taps] IETF-93 agenda (v.0)
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: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 22:31:01 -0000

Transport Services (TAPS) Working Group
Thursday, July 23, 1300-1500
Karlin I/II


Note: all discussion is regarding completion of
draft-ietf-taps-transports-06


0. Administrivia (5 min)

1. Review of schedule for taking draft-ietf-taps-transports to working
   group last call this year.  (5 min)

2. Review of protocols we don't have text for yet.  (We're looking at
   you, RTP.) (5 min)

   Q: Are there any other missing protocols worth holding up the
      document?

3. Document Review (30 min)

   Discussion of "refactored" transport protocol components.  In -06
   we have redefined the components of TCP to be closer (in our
   opinion) to the actual interactions between each of the behaviors
   of the protocol. This is necessarily messier than starting from a
   "clean" set of features and working backward, as TCP was not
   designed as a composition of behaviors, rather evolving around a
   set of constraints.

   Q: Is this an acceptable approach?

4. Substantive Discussion: Features (30 min)

   Regardless of how we decompose the protocols, we do know enough
   about *some* transport service features to start writing detailed
   information about the features -- the discussion here will focus on
   draft-gjessing-taps-minset and/or section 4 of
   draft-ietf-taps-transports.

   Q: Administrative question: where is the split between these
      documents?

   Q: Primary technical question: what do we know about the features
      that belong in this minimum set that we can start writing?

5. Substantive Discussion: Interfaces (30 min)

   Discussion on interfaces/APIs and how we should consider them as
   input for the TAPS effort.  There are three broad areas of
   questions about the eventual interface that TAPS will provide: (a)
   what are the knobs? (and who gets to turn them: app developer,
   user, administrator, kernel developer, etc)?  (b) what are the
   meters (and who gets to see them)?  (c) what are the patterns of
   interaction supported by existing interfaces?

   Q: Does this start work on the second document or is there
      something we can take from (abstract and concrete) interfaces
      already deployed that would inform the decomposition of
      transport protocols/services?