Re: [Taps] Prague agenda planning

["Aaron Falk" <[e-mail]>]

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?


* `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?

* Socket Intents, Philipp
   * Again, what specific topics should we discuss?
   * We’ve been told to expect 3 drafts: on general concepts, BSD 
implementation, & communication granularity.  What’s worth discussing?

* Michio Honda HotNets paper “[PASTE: Network Stacks Must Integrate 
with NVMM 
Abstractions](http://www.ht.sfc.keio.ac.jp/~micchie/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.

* Transport Security Protocol Survey, Tommy