Subject: [Taps] Implementation should separate out protocol-specific bits

From: "Philipp S. Tiesel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:16:02 -0400

Hi,

as time did not permit to discuss all open issues in the session today, I’ll take them to the list as proposed.
This issue is based on Github issue #248: https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues/248

The issue suggests to restructure the API to separate out protocol-specific bits.

Right now, there are protocol specific examples mixed into the generic flow description; then, later, there is a section that has some description for protocol specific considerations.

Possible re-organizations:

a) Per-protocol mappings for each API call + per-protocol specific options. This is a guide to each protocol, such as a section for UDP and how each call is imple-mented for UDP, and what options UDP offers specifically. General discussion about Pre-Establishment, Establishment, Data Transfer, etc, that has less information about specific protocols.

b) Structure everything with the general topics (Pre-Establishment, Establishment, Data Transfer, etc), and have a rigorous list of each protocol's mappings at the end of each section. So, for Establishment, we describe racing, etc; and then go through and explain what Initiate() does for TCP, UDP, UDP Lite, QUIC, SCTP.

AVE!
   Philipp S. Tiesel

-- 
Philipp S. Tiesel 
https://philipp.tiesel.net/