Re: [Taps] TAPS charter rev 20140826

On 27 Aug 2014, at 09:22, Anna Brunstrom wrote: > Looks good to me as well. > Thanks for all your efforts with the charter! I agree with Anna! Best regards Michael > > Anna > > On 2014-08-27 00:27, Aaron Falk wrote: >> See charter rev below. Change highlights: >> - reverted to earlier 2nd d

Re: [Taps] update on TAPS doc 1

On 20 Oct 2014, at 20:34, Aaron Falk wrote: > Hi Folks- > > Gorry Fairhurst & Brian Gravel have agreed to edit the first TAPS doc that > will define a set of Transport Services, identifying the services provided by > existing IETF protocols and congestion control mechanisms. The plan is to >

Re: [Taps] new draft available: draft-fairhurst-taps-transports-00

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

Re: [Taps] new draft available: draft-fairhurst-taps-transports-00

On 28 Oct 2014, at 17:04, Aaron Falk wrote: > Hi Folks- > > Gorry & Brian have published an annotated framework for TAPS doc 1 on > transport services here. We'll discuss whether to adopt it as a working > group doc in Honolulu. I encourage you to send comments and offers to > contribute te

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 Dec 2014, at 00:14, Michael Welzl wrote: > >> 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: >>>> &g

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-02.txt

> On 09 Feb 2015, at 17:48, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: > > > > This version includes my first go at a table, in section 4.1, I'm hoping this > will stimulate some input/corrections, or even perhaps alternate list of what > to see here. Please discuss, or send comments via the TAPS list. Hi Gorry,

Re: [Taps] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-taps-transports-03.txt

> On 16 Mar 2015, at 14:07, Mirja Kühlewind > wrote: > > Hi Karen, > > section 3 should describe what currently is standardized. Am I right that > there is no RFC on CMT SCTP (yet)… and that this was/is the reason that there > was some discussion that this is out of scope? If so, what the sta

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-03.txt

> On 17 Mar 2015, at 11:09, Michael Welzl wrote: > > Hi, > > >> On 16 Mar 2015, at 23:54, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen >> wrote: >> >> HI, >> >> Please accept the following "minor" comments/questions to the TCP protocol >> components: >> >> #1: >> The list include both of the followings:

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-03.txt

Hi Karen, thank you very much for the review. See my comments in-line. Best regards Michael > On 20 Mar 2015, at 05:29, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen > wrote: > > HI, > > Please accept the following comments to the SCTP section. > > Generally I think that the section is extremely well writ

Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP

> On 04 Jun 2015, at 20:27, Joe Touch wrote: > > > > On 6/4/2015 11:15 AM, Pal Martinsen (palmarti) wrote: >> >>> On 04 Jun 2015, at 17:43, Joe Touch >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 6/4/2015 3:48 AM, Pal Martinsen (palmarti) wrote: >>> ... Does it make sense for th

Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP

> On 04 Jun 2015, at 21:17, Joe Touch wrote: > > > > On 6/4/2015 12:08 PM, Pal Martinsen (palmarti) wrote: > ... >>> UDP passes all ICMP messages to the app. If the app doesn't listen for >>> it, that’s the app's decision. >>> >> Then there is a lot UDP application developers out there that do

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-04.txt

> On 05 Jun 2015, at 11:05, Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> On 5. jun. 2015, at 10.12, Mirja Kühlewind >> wrote: >> >> Okay, just to quickly clarify. In the charter only the word service is used. >> We defined later on the words component and feature which are currently not >> reflected in the

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-04.txt

> On 05 Jun 2015, at 15:39, Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> On 05 Jun 2015, at 12:35, Michael Tuexen >> wrote: >> >>> On 05 Jun 2015, at 11:05, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 5. jun. 2015, at 10.12, Mirja Kühlewind >

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-04.txt

> On 05 Jun 2015, at 16:03, Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> On 05 Jun 2015, at 15:52, Michael Tuexen >> wrote: >> >>> On 05 Jun 2015, at 15:39, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 05 Jun 2015, at 12:35, Michael Tuexen >&

Re: [Taps] I-D Action: draft-ietf-taps-transports-04.txt

> On 05 Jun 2015, at 22:17, Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> On 5. jun. 2015, at 19.52, Michael Tuexen >> wrote: >> >>> On 05 Jun 2015, at 16:03, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On 05 Jun 2015, at 15:52, Michael Tuexen >&

Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP

> From: Taps [mailto:taps-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Joe Touch >> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 8:24 PM >> To: Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen; Michael Tuexen >> Cc: Pal Martinsen (palmarti); taps@ietf.org; to...@isi.edu >> Subject: Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP >

Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP

> On 15 Jul 2015, at 20:23, Joe Touch wrote: > > > > On 7/15/2015 4:16 AM, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen wrote: > ... > Any pitfalls with ICMP when doing SCTP? In many ways, SCTP subsumes similar requirements as TCP, but that's probably buried in the SCTP docs. >>> It is. Se

Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP

> On 16 Jul 2015, at 11:09, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen > wrote: > > HI Michael, > Agreed, however the other ways that SCTP doesn't pass validated ICMPs to the user seems like a mistake to me. >>> [Karen ] I agree and we have for our SW recently discussed as to >>> whether we

Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP

> On 16 Jul 2015, at 12:26, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen > wrote: > > HI Michael, >>> >>> [Karen ] This might (the MAY) results in hard trouble if the >>> association is closed due to entering of dormant state. >>> That's why we believe that this MAY reaction should be coupled with >>> robust

Re: [Taps] TAPS Transports and ICMP

> On 16 Jul 2015, at 13:13, Karen Elisabeth Egede Nielsen > wrote: > > HI Michael, > >> -Original Message----- >> From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:michael.tue...@lurchi.franken.de] >> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 12:45 PM >> To: Karen Elisabeth Egede

Re: [Taps] document progress update?

> On 03 Sep 2015, at 21:14, Brian Trammell wrote: > > Ah, didn't see this was sent to the list, so: > > >>> On 03 Sep 2015, at 21:09, Aaron Falk wrote: >>> >>> From the minutes I have the following changes (this may not be complete): >>> • Karen & Michael will add some text on SCTP >> >>

Re: [Taps] RFC 6458 etc. in draft-welzl-taps-transports

> On 03 Nov 2015, at 14:33, go...@erg.abdn.ac.uk wrote: > > A note just on the INFO status of SCTP APIs (below): >> >> Dear all, >> >> Sorry for not being able to attend the TAPS meeting on site or even >> remotely. I just finished watching the recording, and I noticed that the >> question of RF

Re: [Taps] MTU / equivalent at the transport layer

> On 7 Dec 2016, at 15:54, Michael Welzl wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have a problem with one particular primitive, or lack of it, in UDP, > UDP-Lite and SCTP. It's something I just don't get. > > Consider this text from draft-fairhurst-taps-transports-usage-udp: > > "GET_INTERFACE_MTU: The GET

Re: [Taps] MTU / equivalent at the transport layer

> On 9 Dec 2016, at 21:23, Joe Touch wrote: > > > > On 12/9/2016 12:14 PM, Michael Tuexen wrote: >>> On 7 Dec 2016, at 15:54, Michael Welzl wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I have a problem with one particular primitive, or lack

Re: [Taps] MTU / equivalent at the transport layer

> On 9 Dec 2016, at 22:12, Joe Touch wrote: > > > > On 12/9/2016 12:28 PM, Michael Tuexen wrote: >>> ... >>>> In the API description in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6458 the MTU >>>> exposed to the application >>>> via the

Re: [Taps] MTU / equivalent at the transport layer

> On 9 Dec 2016, at 22:30, Joe Touch wrote: > > > > On 12/9/2016 1:26 PM, Michael Tuexen wrote: >> >> Not sure what the reassembly limit is... SCTP handled arbitrary sized >> user messages a the receiver side by using partial delivery. >> >> Th

Re: [Taps] User-Space Networking in iOS 11

On 8. Jun 2017, at 15:50, Tommy Pauly wrote: > > Hello, > > I wanted to point the TAPS group to some of the work that we announced this > week at WWDC that relates to the Post-Sockets API effort. You can see a video > of the session here (relevant section at ~13:50), along with the slides: >

Re: [Taps] User-Space Networking in iOS 11

> On 9. Jun 2017, at 12:16, Tommy Pauly wrote: > > HI Michael, > >> On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:13 PM, Michael Tuexen >> wrote: >> >> On 8. Jun 2017, at 15:50, Tommy Pauly wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I wanted to point the

Re: [Taps] User-Space Networking in iOS 11

> On 10. Jun 2017, at 19:04, Tommy Pauly wrote: > > > >> On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:55 PM, Michael Tuexen >> wrote: >> >>> On 9. Jun 2017, at 12:16, Tommy Pauly wrote: >>> >>> HI Michael, >>> >>>> On Jun 8, 2017

Re: [Taps] New Transport Networking APIs in iOS 12 beta

> On 8. Jun 2018, at 18:29, Tommy Pauly wrote: > > Hello TAPS! > > This week we released Network.framework, a new set of transport APIs, as part > of the beta for iOS 12 and macOS Mojave. > > This API provides support for connections and listeners using TCP, UDP, TLS, > and DTLS; connecting b