Erik Kline has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-taps-arch-18: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-taps-arch/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- # Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-taps-arch-18 CC @ekline * comment syntax: - https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md * "Handling Ballot Positions": - https://ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ ## Comments ### S1.4 * "Racing: ... along with any security parameters" Should this be "Security Parameters" (caps) to refer to the subsequent definition? ### S2.1 * "generally uses a try-and-fail model" I'm not so sure about "generally"; mostly I've seen apps use a kernel-assisted callback style (select/poll/epoll/kqueue/...). It's probably not worth spending too much time trying to recraft text, but if it seems relevant to mention perhaps give it some thought. ### S4.1 * s/connection object/Connection Object/g or s/connection object/Connection object/g? ### S4.1.5 * "Messages are sent in the payload of IP packet." What does this mean in the context of a TCP-TLS transport or a transport using a Framer? A Message will indeed be _somewhere_ in the payload section of an IP packet, but the statement as written might be construed as a Message occupying the entirety of the payload, I think. ### S4.1.7 * What happens if an app wants to half-close without sending a message (e.g. accept() or connect() followed by some flavor of shutdown())? Without having read the other documents yet I'm just wondering how this might be implemented. ### S4.2.3 * Should the definitions in Section 1.4 contain an entry for Connection Context? * Should Figure 3 contain some indication of where a Connection Context fits? ## Nits ### S1.4 * "such as a hostnames or URL": s/hostnames/hostname/ or s/a hostnames/hostnames/ ### S4 * Consider putting a box around "Network Layer Interface" in Figure 3, for consistency with Figures 1 & 2. _______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
