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. > > > > Say we include DCCP. It’ll add some services that aren’t in the other > > protocols listed so far in this mail - e.g. drop notification (see > > section 3.6.3 in draft-ietf-taps-transports). Say, in step ii), we > > find no good arguments to remove drop notification. Then, in step > > iii), we’ll have to say how a TAPS system can support drop > > notification. So, to build a working TAPS system, one has to either: > > - include DCCP in the code base > > - extend other protocols to provide this functionality > > SCTP also provides drop notification (SEND_FAILURE). BR, Karen _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
