Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Hi Aaron, We should have updates by March on the Post-Sockets progress, as well as filling in details that we we're able to get to last time. Please do allocate an agenda slot for that! Thanks, Tommy > On Dec 21, 2016, at 7:25 AM, Aaron Falk wrote: > > The secretariat has issued the call for wg sessions. It would be helpful if > we had an early idea of the agenda for a TAPS meeting in March. Should we > try again to get in the talks on post-sockets and NEAT? Are there any other > implementation projects that would like to present? Any other topics to > discuss? > > —aaron > > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Hi, We NEATers would love to give the presentation that was dropped the last time. Other news from my / our side: - getting closer to the finish line with the -usage draft: quite a lot of updates already done, one major one due early Jan, then we want to submit… - some ideas (thanks to everyone for input at the last meeting! that was helpful!) for the minset draft, it’s bound to change quite a bit and hopefully provoke an interesting discussion; for now, the plan is to also finish that off fast, i.e. maybe in january… cheers Michael > On Dec 21, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: > > The secretariat has issued the call for wg sessions. It would be helpful if > we had an early idea of the agenda for a TAPS meeting in March. Should we > try again to get in the talks on post-sockets and NEAT? Are there any other > implementation projects that would like to present? Any other topics to > discuss? > > —aaron > > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Picking up on this thread and soliciting agenda items for Chicago. What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? —aaron On 22 Dec 2016, at 20:16, Michael Welzl wrote: Hi, We NEATers would love to give the presentation that was dropped the last time. Other news from my / our side: - getting closer to the finish line with the -usage draft: quite a lot of updates already done, one major one due early Jan, then we want to submit… - some ideas (thanks to everyone for input at the last meeting! that was helpful!) for the minset draft, it’s bound to change quite a bit and hopefully provoke an interesting discussion; for now, the plan is to also finish that off fast, i.e. maybe in january… cheers Michael On Dec 21, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: The secretariat has issued the call for wg sessions. It would be helpful if we had an early idea of the agenda for a TAPS meeting in March. Should we try again to get in the talks on post-sockets and NEAT? Are there any other implementation projects that would like to present? Any other topics to discuss? —aaron ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Hi, I’ll answer with an apology: "early Jan, then” turned out differently… indeed we’ve been working on the -usage and -minset docs since fall and did NOT just wait until the last minute! BUT it’s taken so long! It’s just… a lot of stuff. I think we have some interesting suggestions to make, coming out of the minset draft. I do think these are important next things to discuss - we should be focusing on charter item 2, what *is* the subset of transport services that a TAPS system should provide? From the top of my head, I can think of these 3 major questions that appeared to us when we worked on our drafts: - how do we handle multi-streaming? It seems to us that it shouldn’t be visible as such, there should be “flows” or “channels” or “connections” or whatever, with priorities and a notion of groups (could be a float each, assigned to “flows” as a property) - how do we handle messaging? If, starting from SCTP, we allow only transport features that can fall-back to TCP (a part of our minset work), then we end up with some ways to send a message, but we can only receive a bytestream. This can lead to a nice and uniform and downwards-compatible interface for the case where a receiving application doesn't need the transport to tell it where messages begin / end (and that’s the ONLY limitation!). We came up with this “application-framed bytestream” (AFra-Bytestream) concept in NEAT) - what about message sizes? I’m not sure this was fully resolved on the mailing list… Cheers Michael > On Feb 21, 2017, at 10:15 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Picking up on this thread and soliciting agenda items for Chicago. What are > the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? > > —aaron > > > > > On 22 Dec 2016, at 20:16, Michael Welzl wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We NEATers would love to give the presentation that was dropped the last >> time. >> Other news from my / our side: >> - getting closer to the finish line with the -usage draft: quite a lot of >> updates already done, one major one due early Jan, then we want to submit… >> - some ideas (thanks to everyone for input at the last meeting! that was >> helpful!) for the minset draft, it’s bound to change quite a bit and >> hopefully provoke an interesting discussion; for now, the plan is to also >> finish that off fast, i.e. maybe in january… >> >> cheers >> Michael >> >> >>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: >>> >>> The secretariat has issued the call for wg sessions. It would be helpful >>> if we had an early idea of the agenda for a TAPS meeting in March. Should >>> we try again to get in the talks on post-sockets and NEAT? Are there any >>> other implementation projects that would like to present? Any other topics >>> to discuss? >>> >>> —aaron >>> >>> ___ >>> Taps mailing list >>> Taps@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps > > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
hi Aaron, Seconding Tommy: we'll (finally) have a draft-trammell-taps-post-sockets-00 out before Chicago. We should report out of an author's meeting we had in Zürich last week, and figure out what (if anything) we'd like to do with the document in the WG. Cheers, Brian > On 21 Feb 2017, at 22:15, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Picking up on this thread and soliciting agenda items for Chicago. What are > the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? > > —aaron > > > > > On 22 Dec 2016, at 20:16, Michael Welzl wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We NEATers would love to give the presentation that was dropped the last >> time. >> Other news from my / our side: >> - getting closer to the finish line with the -usage draft: quite a lot of >> updates already done, one major one due early Jan, then we want to submit… >> - some ideas (thanks to everyone for input at the last meeting! that was >> helpful!) for the minset draft, it’s bound to change quite a bit and >> hopefully provoke an interesting discussion; for now, the plan is to also >> finish that off fast, i.e. maybe in january… >> >> cheers >> Michael >> >> >>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: >>> >>> The secretariat has issued the call for wg sessions. It would be helpful >>> if we had an early idea of the agenda for a TAPS meeting in March. Should >>> we try again to get in the talks on post-sockets and NEAT? Are there any >>> other implementation projects that would like to present? Any other topics >>> to discuss? >>> >>> —aaron >>> >>> ___ >>> Taps mailing list >>> Taps@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps > > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Trimming for focus… What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? I can think of these 3 major questions that appeared to us when we worked on our drafts: - how do we handle multi-streaming? - how do we handle messaging? - what about message sizes? These seem like good discussion topics. Who would like to lead a short discussion on each? —aaron ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
> On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:54 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Trimming for focus… > >>> >>> What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? >>> >> I can think of these 3 major questions that appeared to us when we worked on >> our drafts: >> >> - how do we handle multi-streaming? >> - how do we handle messaging? >> - what about message sizes? > > These seem like good discussion topics. Who would like to lead a short > discussion on each? I’d volunteer for all 3. Priority order: 1. messaging - I’d really like to lead the discussion on this one 2. multi-streaming 3. message sizes - this one I feel the least secure about. Cheers, Michael ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
> On Feb 23, 2017, at 12:55 AM, Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:54 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: >> >> Trimming for focus… >> What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? >>> I can think of these 3 major questions that appeared to us when we worked >>> on our drafts: >>> >>> - how do we handle multi-streaming? >>> - how do we handle messaging? >>> - what about message sizes? >> >> These seem like good discussion topics. Who would like to lead a short >> discussion on each? > > I’d volunteer for all 3. Priority order: > 1. messaging - I’d really like to lead the discussion on this one > 2. multi-streaming I'd like to volunteer to lead the discussion about how to handle multi streaming protocols. We've been working on that and giving it a lot of thought for our protocol stack. Thanks, Tommy > 3. message sizes - this one I feel the least secure about. > > Cheers, > Michael > > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
> On Feb 23, 2017, at 7:05 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote: > > >> On Feb 23, 2017, at 12:55 AM, Michael Welzl wrote: >> >> >>> On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:54 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: >>> >>> Trimming for focus… >>> > > What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? > I can think of these 3 major questions that appeared to us when we worked on our drafts: - how do we handle multi-streaming? - how do we handle messaging? - what about message sizes? >>> >>> These seem like good discussion topics. Who would like to lead a short >>> discussion on each? >> >> I’d volunteer for all 3. Priority order: >> 1. messaging - I’d really like to lead the discussion on this one >> 2. multi-streaming > > I'd like to volunteer to lead the discussion about how to handle multi > streaming protocols. We've been working on that and giving it a lot of > thought for our protocol stack. Speaking as someone who volunteered for the same: I’d be absolutely fine with that. Cheers, Michael ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
On 23 Feb 2017, at 13:33, Michael Welzl wrote: On Feb 23, 2017, at 7:05 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote: On Feb 23, 2017, at 12:55 AM, Michael Welzl wrote: On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:54 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: Trimming for focus… What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? I can think of these 3 major questions that appeared to us when we worked on our drafts: - how do we handle multi-streaming? - how do we handle messaging? - what about message sizes? These seem like good discussion topics. Who would like to lead a short discussion on each? I’d volunteer for all 3. Priority order: 1. messaging - I’d really like to lead the discussion on this one 2. multi-streaming I'd like to volunteer to lead the discussion about how to handle multi streaming protocols. We've been working on that and giving it a lot of thought for our protocol stack. Speaking as someone who volunteered for the same: I’d be absolutely fine with that. So, seems like we still could use someone to lead a discussion about message sizes. I confess I don’t recall what the concern is. Michael, can you expand a little? —aaron ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
> On Feb 23, 2017, at 7:59 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: > > On 23 Feb 2017, at 13:33, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> On Feb 23, 2017, at 7:05 PM, Tommy Pauly wrote: On Feb 23, 2017, at 12:55 AM, Michael Welzl wrote: > On Feb 22, 2017, at 3:54 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Trimming for focus… > >>> >>> What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? >>> >> I can think of these 3 major questions that appeared to us when we >> worked on our drafts: >> >> - how do we handle multi-streaming? >> - how do we handle messaging? >> - what about message sizes? > > These seem like good discussion topics. Who would like to lead a short > discussion on each? I’d volunteer for all 3. Priority order: 1. messaging - I’d really like to lead the discussion on this one 2. multi-streaming >>> >>> I'd like to volunteer to lead the discussion about how to handle multi >>> streaming protocols. We've been working on that and giving it a lot of >>> thought for our protocol stack. >> >> Speaking as someone who volunteered for the same: I’d be absolutely fine >> with that. >> > > So, seems like we still could use someone to lead a discussion about message > sizes. I confess I don’t recall what the concern is. Michael, can you > expand a little? UDP applications (at least) sometimes need to know the PMTU - e.g. that was on the list of things a latency-critical application needs, presented by Colin at the last meeting. The PMTU is a per-path property. Should a TAPS system be fully aware of a physical path? If so, consider: the PMTU is including all headers - so the message size that fits in will be different for v4 and v6. For the real message size that fits in, subtract the UDP header too. Then we’re dependent on layers 3 AND 4 … not how a TAPS system should be! Yet, for apps that want to do PMTUD (common above UDP), an app *must* be able to send a packet exceeding the MTU… how should all this be handled / exposed in a TAPS system? Cheers, Michael ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Hi Aaron, all, We would like to give an update on our work on happy eyeballs. We plan to submit an updated draft before the meeting cut-off. Cheers, Anna On 2017-02-21 22:15, Aaron Falk wrote: Picking up on this thread and soliciting agenda items for Chicago. What are the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? —aaron On 22 Dec 2016, at 20:16, Michael Welzl wrote: Hi, We NEATers would love to give the presentation that was dropped the last time. Other news from my / our side: - getting closer to the finish line with the -usage draft: quite a lot of updates already done, one major one due early Jan, then we want to submit… - some ideas (thanks to everyone for input at the last meeting! that was helpful!) for the minset draft, it’s bound to change quite a bit and hopefully provoke an interesting discussion; for now, the plan is to also finish that off fast, i.e. maybe in january… cheers Michael On Dec 21, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: The secretariat has issued the call for wg sessions. It would be helpful if we had an early idea of the agenda for a TAPS meeting in March. Should we try again to get in the talks on post-sockets and NEAT? Are there any other implementation projects that would like to present? Any other topics to discuss? —aaron ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Hi, Also from us - on top of the discussion items, there will be updates of our drafts to present: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if possible, Naeem Khademi or myself draft-gjessing-taps-minset-04 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if possible, Stein Gjessing Cheers, Michael > On 27 Feb 2017, at 23:55, Anna Brunstrom wrote: > > Hi Aaron, all, > > We would like to give an update on our work on happy eyeballs. We plan to > submit an updated draft before the meeting cut-off. > > Cheers, > Anna > > > On 2017-02-21 22:15, Aaron Falk wrote: >> Picking up on this thread and soliciting agenda items for Chicago. What are >> the key questions TAPS should be focusing on at this meeting? >> >> —aaron >> >> >> >> >> On 22 Dec 2016, at 20:16, Michael Welzl wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We NEATers would love to give the presentation that was dropped the last >>> time. >>> Other news from my / our side: >>> - getting closer to the finish line with the -usage draft: quite a lot of >>> updates already done, one major one due early Jan, then we want to submit… >>> - some ideas (thanks to everyone for input at the last meeting! that was >>> helpful!) for the minset draft, it’s bound to change quite a bit and >>> hopefully provoke an interesting discussion; for now, the plan is to also >>> finish that off fast, i.e. maybe in january… >>> >>> cheers >>> Michael >>> >>> On Dec 21, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: The secretariat has issued the call for wg sessions. It would be helpful if we had an early idea of the agenda for a TAPS meeting in March. Should we try again to get in the talks on post-sockets and NEAT? Are there any other implementation projects that would like to present? Any other topics to discuss? —aaron ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps >> >> ___ >> Taps mailing list >> Taps@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps > > > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Summarizing the agenda proposals. Did I miss anything? Names ok? Note we need a leader for message sizes… —aaron - - - Working group document updates * draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if possible, Naeem Khademi or myself * draft-gjessing-taps-minset-04 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if possible, Stein Gjessing TAPS Design Discussions * Messaging, introduced by Michael Welzl * Multi-streaming, introduced by Tommy Pauly * message sizes & PMTU, introduced by ??? Related Projects * Happy Eyeballs, Anna Brunstrom * NEAT, Naeem Khademi &/or Michael Welzl * Post-Sockets, Tommy Pauly &/or Brian Trammel (remote) ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Hi, We can't try to solve all the world's problems in one meeting. So I suggest a more easily resolvable one: early data transmission (TFO, ..). I could volunteer to lead this discussion; I have a feeling that Tommy might also want to volunteer, in which case I'd happily let him take the lead. Cheers, Michael > On 28 Feb 2017, at 16:24, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Summarizing the agenda proposals. Did I miss anything? Names ok? Note we need > a leader for message sizes… > > —aaron > > Working group document updates > > • draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if > possible, Naeem Khademi or myself > • draft-gjessing-taps-minset-04 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if > possible, Stein Gjessing > TAPS Design Discussions > > • Messaging, introduced by Michael Welzl > • Multi-streaming, introduced by Tommy Pauly > • message sizes & PMTU, introduced by ??? > Related Projects > > • Happy Eyeballs, Anna Brunstrom > • NEAT, Naeem Khademi &/or Michael Welzl > • Post-Sockets, Tommy Pauly &/or Brian Trammel (remote) > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
Sounds good to me. I’ll put you down as presenter and if Tommy wants in you guys can work it out. We have two hours so here’s the current agenda with times. I assume the time will split evenly within topics but you all can work out alternatives if you like. Seem reasonable? Any tweaks? —aaron - - - - # TAPS DRAFT AGENDA ## Administrivia and Chair’s Blah-blah - 10 min ## Working group document updates - 20 min * draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03, Naeem Khademi or Michael Welzl * draft-gjessing-taps-minset-04, Stein Gjessing ## TAPS Design Discussions - 60 min * Messaging, introduced by Michael Welzl * Multi-streaming, introduced by Tommy Pauly * Early data transmission, introduced by Michael Welzl ## Related Projects - 30 min * Happy Eyeballs, Anna Brunstrom * NEAT, Naeem Khademi &/or Michael Welzl * Post-Sockets, Tommy Pauly &/or Brian Trammel (remote) ___ On 2 Mar 2017, at 9:11, Michael Welzl wrote: Hi, We can't try to solve all the world's problems in one meeting. So I suggest a more easily resolvable one: early data transmission (TFO, ..). I could volunteer to lead this discussion; I have a feeling that Tommy might also want to volunteer, in which case I'd happily let him take the lead. Cheers, Michael On 28 Feb 2017, at 16:24, Aaron Falk wrote: Summarizing the agenda proposals. Did I miss anything? Names ok? Note we need a leader for message sizes… —aaron Working group document updates • draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if possible, Naeem Khademi or myself • draft-gjessing-taps-minset-04 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if possible, Stein Gjessing TAPS Design Discussions • Messaging, introduced by Michael Welzl • Multi-streaming, introduced by Tommy Pauly • message sizes & PMTU, introduced by ??? Related Projects • Happy Eyeballs, Anna Brunstrom • NEAT, Naeem Khademi &/or Michael Welzl • Post-Sockets, Tommy Pauly &/or Brian Trammel (remote) ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
Re: [Taps] agenda planning for chicago
looks good to me... > On 03 Mar 2017, at 16:41, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Sounds good to me. I’ll put you down as presenter and if Tommy wants in you > guys can work it out. We have two hours so here’s the current agenda with > times. I assume the time will split evenly within topics but you all can work > out alternatives if you like. Seem reasonable? Any tweaks? > > —aaron > > TAPS DRAFT AGENDA > > Administrivia and Chair’s Blah-blah - 10 min > > Working group document updates - 20 min > > • draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03, Naeem Khademi or Michael Welzl > • draft-gjessing-taps-minset-04, Stein Gjessing > TAPS Design Discussions - 60 min > > • Messaging, introduced by Michael Welzl > • Multi-streaming, introduced by Tommy Pauly > • Early data transmission, introduced by Michael Welzl > Related Projects - 30 min > > • Happy Eyeballs, Anna Brunstrom > • NEAT, Naeem Khademi &/or Michael Welzl > • Post-Sockets, Tommy Pauly &/or Brian Trammel (remote) > On 2 Mar 2017, at 9:11, Michael Welzl wrote: > > > Hi, > > We can't try to solve all the world's problems in one meeting. So I suggest a > more easily resolvable one: early data transmission (TFO, ..). > > I could volunteer to lead this discussion; I have a feeling that Tommy might > also want to volunteer, in which case I'd happily let him take the lead. > > Cheers, > Michael > > On 28 Feb 2017, at 16:24, Aaron Falk wrote: > > Summarizing the agenda proposals. Did I miss anything? Names ok? Note we need > a leader for message sizes… > > —aaron > > Working group document updates > > • draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if > possible, Naeem Khademi or myself > • draft-gjessing-taps-minset-04 (to be submitted): 10-15 mins if possible, > Stein Gjessing > TAPS Design Discussions > > • Messaging, introduced by Michael Welzl > • Multi-streaming, introduced by Tommy Pauly > • message sizes & PMTU, introduced by ??? > Related Projects > > • Happy Eyeballs, Anna Brunstrom > • NEAT, Naeem Khademi &/or Michael Welzl > • Post-Sockets, Tommy Pauly &/or Brian Trammel (remote) > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps > > ___ > Taps mailing list > Taps@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps ___ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
