On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Toerless Eckert <tte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
APIs suffer the neverending debate of "not an IETF job, go to POSIX".
IMHO, IETF should define APIs, eg: let TAPS really do the work thats
now declared out of scope. And then go to POSIX with the results.
+1
POSIX is a non entity as far as platforms are concerned for a start. If you want to affect the world then persuade Microsoft, Apple and Google to do the right thing it will happen. Waiting on an external party that does not influence the platforms of consequence is doomed to fail.
If IETF had no influence at all in any of those organizations, we would be in trouble but the exact opposite is the case. They are all represented in IETF and the people representing them (mostly) want to do the right thing.
APIs are also not the complete answer.
OS independent, readily available and easily adopted network SDKs are the answer.
Upgradeable independent of app and OS. The only mayor instance of this
are browsers and then look at how slow web sockets are evolving. And
the issue really are the billions of embedded devices / apps where
browsers don't play.
It is not the API itself so much as the abstract API that is the issue. What we need to do is to work out which interests we see as being things we want the application programmer to care about and which things we want them to NOT care about.