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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Ranking criteria for Protocol Option not described #1102

Closed
zaheduzzaman opened this issue Jan 20, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1108
Closed

Ranking criteria for Protocol Option not described #1102

zaheduzzaman opened this issue Jan 20, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1108
Labels
discuss Implementation

Comments

@zaheduzzaman
Copy link
Member

api-drafts/draft-ietf-taps-impl.md

Line 289 in c70520f

This approach is commonly used for connections with optional proxy server configurations. A single connection might have several options available: an HTTP-based proxy, a SOCKS-based proxy, or no proxy. These options should be ranked and attempted in succession.

I think we should add a similar ranking consideration description as we have for Network paths. Otherwise, I am not sure how to rank the protocol option.
@abrunstrom abrunstrom mentioned this issue Jan 30, 2023
Merged
@abrunstrom
Copy link
Contributor

I think here as well that the options should be ranked based on preference, system policy, and performance. I made a pull request to add it.

@zaheduzzaman
Copy link
Member Author

LGTM, lets of others have any opinion about it..

@mwelzl
Copy link
Contributor

mwelzl commented Feb 2, 2023

I agree with @abrunstrom

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
discuss Implementation
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Add ranking criteria for protocol options ietf-tapswg/api-drafts
3 participants
@zaheduzzaman @mwelzl @abrunstrom