So I did say this before, but to get the ball rolling: > On 28. okt. 2015, at 15.10, Aaron Falk <aaron.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've not heard any objections to work on this document and several proposals > for why it would help docs 2 & 3 (as well as the implementations based on 3). > > > 1. Should TAPS adopt draft-welzl-taps-transports as a working group > deliverable? > > 2. To some folks it sounds as though this doc is a pre-requisite to doc 2. > Do folks agree? Can we start on doc 2 in parallel or should we wait?
I do think that doc 2 should be based on draft-welzl-taps-transports, i.e. I think we should wait for a bit. We could get started before draft-welzl-taps-transports is completely finished, but I think we should give it at least 1-2 more iterations before starting to narrow it down in doc 2. Cheers, Michael _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
