Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Specific Transport Protocol Considerations #1150

Open
mwelzl opened this issue May 9, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

Specific Transport Protocol Considerations #1150

mwelzl opened this issue May 9, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels

Comments

@mwelzl
Copy link
Contributor

mwelzl commented May 9, 2023

  1. Specific Transport Protocol Considerations

Each protocol that is supported by a Transport Services
implementation should have a well-defined API mapping.

This seems to be an odd statement. Of course, each of the common
protocols MUST have a well-defined API mapping, but also, that mapping
MUST be specified in the API definition document, or otherwise
applications couldn't use it in a standardized way. So why is the word
"should" used, and why is there not a reference at this point to the
API document that specifies these mappings?

Each protocol has a notion of Connectedness. Possible values for
Connectedness are:

"values" isn't the right word. Perhaps "Possible definitions of
Connectedness for various types of protocols are:"

I notice that the following protocols are mentioned in the document,
some seemingly as examples, but are not listed in sec. 10. What is
their status? Does the API definition state how to use them? If not,
why are they mentioned in the implementation document?
DTLS
HTTP
HTTP2/TLS/TCP
HTTP3/QUIC/UDP
QUIC

The absence of discussion of any of the HTTP request/response
protocols is particularly worrisome, as it suggests that there is no
defined way to use the API to use HTTP, and yet people write as if
implementations will support it.


From the review by Dale Worley: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/bpBk8QxZMLksr3ZuROtf2_BXYdI/
Note that indentation was lost by copy+pasting here - look at the edited version or the version at the URL to get a clearer view of what is being quoted.

@tfpauly
Copy link
Contributor

tfpauly commented May 15, 2023

This is pointing to future work on other mappings documents.

@gorryfair
Copy link
Contributor

Discussed on TAPS Call on 15th May and this is future work that seems possible within the architcture, but not for this document.

@mwelzl
Copy link
Contributor Author

mwelzl commented Nov 1, 2023

#1440 addresses:

Each protocol has a notion of Connectedness. Possible values for
Connectedness are:

"values" isn't the right word. Perhaps "Possible definitions of
Connectedness for various types of protocols are:"

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants