Hi,
Thanks a lot for a good start.
I notice that MPTCP is quoted as a transport protocol but that CMT-SCTP
isn’t. I assume that this
is motivated by the fact that the taps work very clearly draws the line in
between
features that have made it through IETF standardisation (even as
informatio
> On 03 Nov 2014, at 13:56, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks a lot for a good start.
>
> I notice that MPTCP is quoted as a transport protocol but that CMT-SCTP
> isn’t. I assume that this
> is motivated by the fact that the taps work very clearly draws the line i
I thin kwe are going to face a lot of "extensions". Maybe a secondary goal
could be to define a standard way to access both IETF and "extension"
transports?
/mjm
Marie-Jose Montpetit, Ph.D.
mari...@mit.edu
@SocialTVMIT
> On Nov 3, 2014, at 9:10 AM, Brian Trammell wrote:
>
>
>> On 03 Nov 2014
See a few comments in-line on various things.
> I thin kwe are going to face a lot of "extensions". Maybe a secondary goal
> could be to define a standard way to access both IETF and "extension"
> transports?
>
I think this may well be the case in the end, although there is still some
way to go be
On 03 Nov 2014, at 15:10, Brian Trammell wrote:
>
>> On 03 Nov 2014, at 13:56, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for a good start.
>>
>> I notice that MPTCP is quoted as a transport protocol but that CMT-SCTP
>> isn’t. I assume that this
>> is motivated
Please note that the TAPS meeting time has been changed to Tuesday,
afternoon session I (1300-1500 HST).
--aaron
___
Taps mailing list
Taps@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
I received no comments regarding agenda content so here is the agenda that
I'm posting.
--aaron
Transport Services (TAPS)
1300-1500 HST Tuesday Afternoon Session I
AGENDA
===
0. Agenda bashing
1. Terminology Review (Trammell, Kühlewind, Fairhurst) - 30 min
2. Discussion of draft-fairhurst-t
