Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

> On 20. des. 2014, at 09.24, Michael Tuexen wrote: > > On 19 Dec 2014, at 23:08, Michael Welzl > wrote: > >> >>> On 20. des. 2014, at 01.13, Brian Trammell wrote: >>> >>> hi Michael, >>> On 19 Dec 2014, at 10:29, Michael Welzl wrote: > On 1

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

On 12/19/2014 2:24 PM, Brian Trammell wrote: ... > I was trying to make a much less subtle point from the interface side: > since SCTP actually _has_ a concept of application PDU, it can bundle > them, while TCP has no such concept, so what it's bundling can't really > be PDUs. TCP has three not

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

On 19 Dec 2014, at 23:08, Michael Welzl wrote: >> >> On 20. des. 2014, at 01.13, Brian Trammell wrote: >> >> hi Michael, >> >>> On 19 Dec 2014, at 10:29, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.05, Brian Trammell wrote: > On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michae

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

On 19 Dec 2014, at 23:08, Michael Welzl wrote: > >> On 20. des. 2014, at 01.13, Brian Trammell wrote: >> >> hi Michael, >> >>> On 19 Dec 2014, at 10:29, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.05, Brian Trammell wrote: > On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

> On 20. des. 2014, at 01.13, Brian Trammell wrote: > > hi Michael, > >> On 19 Dec 2014, at 10:29, Michael Welzl wrote: >> >> >>> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.05, Brian Trammell wrote: >>> >>> On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael Welzl wrote: Hi, Thanks for this update

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

One additional point: TCP services described in 3.1.3 should also include PUSH and URG capabilities. FWIW, the specific section of RFC793 that defines the TCP interfaces - above and below - is 3.8. Joe On 12/18/2014 3:39 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > Some feedback below. Although I focus on some TCP a

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

> On 19 Dec 2014, at 10:35, Michael Welzl wrote: > >> >> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.29, Michael Welzl wrote: >> >> >>> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.05, Brian Trammell wrote: >>> >>> On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael Welzl wrote: Hi, Thanks for this update! A

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

hi Michael, > On 19 Dec 2014, at 10:29, Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.05, Brian Trammell wrote: >> >> >>> On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks for this update! >>> >>> A question: >>> We've posted a -01 rev of the TAPS tran

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.29, Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.05, Brian Trammell wrote: >> >> >>> On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks for this update! >>> >>> A question: >>> We've posted a -01 rev of the TAPS transports doc

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

> On 19. des. 2014, at 20.05, Brian Trammell wrote: > > >> On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael Welzl wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for this update! >> >> A question: >> >>> We've posted a -01 rev of the TAPS transports document. We believe that the >>> format and level of detail for the TCP

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-01.txt

> On 18 Dec 2014, at 22:37, Michael Welzl wrote: > > Hi, > > Thanks for this update! > > A question: > >> We've posted a -01 rev of the TAPS transports document. We believe that the >> format and level of detail for the TCP section is about what we're targeting >> for each of the other sect