On 4/30/2014 7:36 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:
On 4/30/14 3:48 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
(that doesn't preclude the benefit of a liason to a language-standards
group, but we shouldn't be seeing IETF proposals for such instances IMO).
Probably not, but it seems pretty clear that deployment
of some IETF protocols has suffered from either the lack
of a comprehensive API, or crappy API.
+1
However, somewhere along the line, AFAICT the IETF started thinking of
protocol APIs as language implementations, and decided (rightly) that
the latter was out of scope, and threw the baby out with the bathwater.
IMO, a protocol is *incomplete* without its protocol API.
I'm thinking of
IPSec, newer DNS features, etc. I think it's very much
in the interest of the IETF to have someone around who
can talk to some of the language standards bodies about
how to expose protocol features, how to deal with options,
etc.
It is, if you can find someone who knows both and can attend both ;-)
Joe