HI,
Just a note. Not necessarily relevant for the overall argument however.
> >
> > So we’re i) describing services; ii) narrowing them down somehow; iii)
> > describing how to build this thing.
> > My concern is with iii) being something feasible and useful, not an
> > obscure sci-fi document.
> On 27. okt. 2015, at 10.44, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen
> wrote:
>
> HI,
>
> Just a note. Not necessarily relevant for the overall argument however.
>
>>>
>>> So we’re i) describing services; ii) narrowing them down somehow; iii)
>>> describing how to build this
Hi Michael,
for me, when I was reading the following, that was when I found it quite
arbitrary again:
"In the list resulting from the second pass, some services are missing
because they are implicit in some protocols, and they only become
explicit when we consider the superset of all
Hi,
Sorry for the long silence. I have been on vacation with almost no internet
connection.
I will attend IETF 94, but I don´t feel ready to lead a discussion about
charter item 2.
However, I will take part in the discussion and gladly contribute to the draft
we eventually have to make to
> On 27. okt. 2015, at 15.46, Mirja Kühlewind
> wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> for me, when I was reading the following, that was when I found it quite
> arbitrary again:
>
> "In the list resulting from the second pass, some services are missing
> because they
>
> How are you going to do this when you don’t know what applies to connection
> opening, connection maintenance, data transfer? What kinds of error messages
> are available?
We need that of course but I don’t see now any list of what are the common
features between all transports (to start