Re: [Taps] FW: QUIC API (was: Re: Small size of core QUIC library to replace TCP for embedded system)

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 7:40 AM Mirja Kuehlewind wrote: > Maybe this is also interesting for taps as a reference... > I sure hope so! Best, Spencer > > On 10.08.20, 22:35, "QUIC on behalf of Dirkjan Ochtman" < > quic-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of dirk...@ochtman.nl> wrote: > > On Fri,

Re: [Taps] Eric Rescorla's No Objection on draft-ietf-taps-minset-08: (with COMMENT)

FWIW, On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 7:03 AM Michael Welzl wrote: > > >> > S 7.2. >> >> > >> >> > o Disable MPTCP >> >> >Protocols: MPTCP >> >> >Automatable because the usage of multiple paths to >> communicate to >> >> >the same end host relates to knowledge about the

Re: [Taps] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-taps-minset-08: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Hi, Alissa, On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:22 PM Alissa Cooper wrote: > Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-taps-minset-08: Discuss > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel

Re: [Taps] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-taps-minset-06

Hi, Michael, On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 15:35 Michael Welzl wrote: > Hi Spencer, > > See below: > > On Aug 31, 2018, at 7:41 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks, Robert, for the careful read, and thanks, Michael, for th

Re: [Taps] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-taps-minset-04

Hi, Michael, On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 8:50 AM Michael Welzl wrote: > > > > On 22 Aug 2018, at 15:20, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, Michael, > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 7:49 AM Michael Welzl > wrote: >

Re: [Taps] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-taps-minset-04

Hi, Michael, On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 7:49 AM Michael Welzl wrote: > Hi, > > > > On 21 Aug 2018, at 22:27, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, Aaron, > > > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 1:44 PM Aaro

Re: [Taps] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-taps-minset-04

Hi, Michael, On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 9:11 AM Michael Welzl wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks again ! > > > > On 20 Aug 2018, at 15:52, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, Michael, > > > > On Mon, Aug 20,

Re: [Taps] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-taps-minset-04

Hi, Michael, On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 3:57 AM Michael Welzl wrote: > Hi Spencer! > > Thank you so much for your detailed work and all these comments! > I'm commenting in line below, and marking my comments with "MW:". > I'm terminating my responses with a "--". > > I'm attaching an update which

Re: [Taps] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-taps-minset-04

Dear TAPsters, I've completed my AD review for this document, and have two high-level responses: - This looks good, and - I only have 8 pages of comments ... Please look these over, and ask for explanations if you need them. When we work through my comments, I'll request Last Call. And

Re: [Taps] virtual interim meeting

Hi, Aaron, On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 10:25 AM, Aaron Falk wrote: > We’d like to hold an interim call to discuss the new docs. > >- Duration: 2hrs >- Method: WebEx >- Time zones to accommodate: PDT, EDT, BST, CEST >- Schedule: w/o May 14 > > Agenda: > >1.

Re: [Taps] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on charter-ietf-taps-01-00: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Kathleen and EKR, On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 6:50 PM, Christopher Wood < christopherwoo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Spencer, > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 4:42 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF > <spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear TAPsters, > > > >

Re: [Taps] Benoit Claise's No Objection on charter-ietf-taps-01-00: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Benoit, On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Benoit Claise wrote: > Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-taps-01-00: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the

Re: [Taps] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on charter-ietf-taps-01-00: (with COMMENT)

Dear TAPsters, On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 10:20 AM, Alissa Cooper wrote: > Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-taps-01-00: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in

Re: [Taps] Ben Campbell's No Objection on charter-ietf-taps-01-00: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Ben, On Jan 24, 2018 9:42 AM, "Ben Campbell" <b...@nostrum.com> wrote: > On Jan 24, 2018, at 8:38 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, Ben, > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:53 AM, Mirja Kühlewind <i...@kuehlewi

Re: [Taps] Ben Campbell's No Objection on charter-ietf-taps-01-00: (with COMMENT)

Hi, Ben, On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:53 AM, Mirja Kühlewind wrote: > Hi Ben, > > this change rather removed the restriction to not analyze features of > security protocols (other than tcpinc); this is mainly the first sentence. > As we see a closer integration of TLS with

Re: [Taps] One RFC, or two, for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage and draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp

-usage-udp draft has already been updated to reflect comments received during balloting. I'll send the Approved e-mails for both drafts as a set. Thanks to everyone who provided input. Spencer, as AD On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com>

Re: [Taps] One RFC, or two, for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage and draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp

was that most readers would not be reading both documents back-to-back, but that's the way ADs would review the documents during IESG Evaluation (they were even on the same telechat). So it's more disorienting for us, than for pretty much anyone else :-) Spencer > > Thanks, > Tommy &

Re: [Taps] One RFC, or two, for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage and draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp

Dear TAPSters, On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Gorry Fairhurst <go...@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote: > On 14/09/2017, 15:55, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > >> And, following up during the actual telechat ... >> >> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Spencer Dawkins

[Taps] One RFC, or two, for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage and draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp

Dear TAPS working group, Multiple ADs have asked why these two drafts aren't a single draft, in their ballots. Those are non-blocking comments, but I'd like to explore that, before making a decision about what should happen, and when. It occurs to me that these ADs are reading both drafts pretty

Re: [Taps] Eric Rescorla's No Record on draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-08: (with COMMENT)

FWIW, On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) < i...@kuehlewind.net> wrote: > Hi Micheal, > > I also just caught that, assuming is was an copy-and-past left over; I > think the best options are either: > > *** > [RFC7413] states that TCP implementations "MUST NOT use TFO by

Re: [Taps] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp-05.txt

Hi, Aaron, On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Aaron Falk <aaron.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > Pull the trigger! > Done. It's a pleasure doing business with you (and Zahed, of course). Spencer > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:05 AM Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawki

Re: [Taps] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp-05.txt

Gorry, On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote: > > This new revision updates the draft to address AD review comments, and to > align the source with ID's that have now been published as RFCs. > It absolutely does. Thank you for that. I've seen updated

Re: [Taps] AD review for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-06

e chairs. Spencer > cheers, > Michael > > > On Aug 24, 2017, at 10:18 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > These are all editorial. > > Thanks, > > Spencer > > A nit - in this text, > >Transport

Re: [Taps] AD Evaluation on the relationship between draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-06 and draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp-04

Hi, Michael, On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Michael Welzl <mich...@ifi.uio.no> wrote: > > On Aug 24, 2017, at 10:24 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Just to make these documents a bit more digestible by reviewers, ADs, and

[Taps] AD review for draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-06

These are all editorial. Thanks, Spencer A nit - in this text, Transport Protocol: an implementation that provides one or more different transport services using a specific framing and header format on the wire. one path through the "or" statement says "provides one

[Taps] AD review of draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp-04

I'm actually pretty positive on this draft - most of what follows is editorial. Thanks, Spencer This text This document is intended as a contribution to the Transport Services (TAPS) working group to assist in analysis of the UDP and UDP-Lite transport interface. Refers to the TAPS

Re: [Taps] draft-fairhurst-taps-transports-usage-udp-01

Hi, Aaron, On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Aaron Falk <aaron.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, Aaron and Gorry, >> >> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 2:3

Re: [Taps] draft-fairhurst-taps-transports-usage-udp-01

Hi, Aaron and Gorry, On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Aaron Falk wrote: > Couple of minor comments on the draft > > : > >- No mention of ECN in phase 2. Am I missing something? >- You had

[Taps] So, catching back up on the charter

If I might make a couple of observations, and ask a question ... Obs: document status: This is actually not as nailed down as you might think. The IESG can, and sometimes does, discuss the proper status for a document as late as IESG Evaluation (I've been involved in one of those conversations