The document shepherd is Theresa Enghardt. The responsible Area Director is
This document recommends a minimal set of transport services offered by end
systems, based on the set of existing transport protocol features surveyed in
RFC 8303. It summarizes which transport features are worth exposing to an
application, in contrast to those which can be automated within a transport
system, addressing TAPS agenda item 2. Furthermore, the document gives guidance
on choosing among the available mechanisms and protocols. The intended
publication type is Informational, as the document provides useful information
about transport services. Its Appendix documents the Working Group's bottom-up
process of finding the right abstraction for the transport system interface.
2. Review and Consensus
As this document generalizes and categorizes primitives that are already
standardized in the RFC series, there was few controversy about them.
Initially, there was not a lot of interest in this agenda item, but eventually
the document was extensively reviewed and discussed by half a dozen active
Working Group participants. In addition, on WGLC the body of the document was
reviewed by a person who had not read the document before, who found it easy to
understand and ready for publication.
Much of the discussion was about coming up with consistent terminology and
about finding the right scope, which now focuses on features of existing
transport protocols that can be implemented over TCP, or UDP if certain
limitations are put in place. It was discussed whether to include security
features, and finally after broadening the TAPS charter, they were put in a
3. Intellectual Property
This document introduces no new technologies beyond those already published.
4. Other Points
There are no normative downward references and no IANA considerations.