On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 01:38:59PM -0400, Paul Kyzivat wrote: > On 5/15/25 12:31 PM, Nico Williams wrote: > > (Also, I'm a big fan of using _APIs_ to help specify _protocols_ > > including _semantics_, but that is not a popular view at the IETF, > > sadly.) > > An API in the general case (e.g., interface declarations for some > programming language) does not define an internet protocol.
Not all by itself, no. But we do have RFCs 2743 and 2744, and related, and those have worked quite well. > I once worked on CORBA. An interface defined in CORBA IDL, together with the > definition of the underlying CORBA protocol, *did* define a higher level > protocol. And IDL + an API comes very close, yes. I did not mean to exclude IDLs. Elsewhere in this thread you'll see as much. Nico -- _______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
