Re: [Dots] Closing DOTS?

+1, Awesome collaboration among the WG participants and the several
hackathon sessions that led to hardened specifications. Many thanks to the
DOTS WG chairs and Security ADs.

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 11:06, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I also think that it is time to close.
>
> Many thanks to the WG participants and Chairs, especially for the good and
> positive collaboration spirit. I personally enjoyed working in this WG.
>
> Cheers,
> Med
>
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Dots <dots-bounces@ietf.org> De la part de supjps-
> > ietf@jpshallow.com
> > Envoyé : mardi 28 mars 2023 00:35
> > À : dots@ietf.org; Valery Smyslov <valery@smyslov.net>
> > Cc : dots-chairs@ietf.org; 'Paul Wouters' <paul.wouters@aiven.io>
> > Objet : Re: [Dots] Closing DOTS?
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I think the DOTS WG has run its natural course and can come to an
> > end.
> >
> > Many thanks to all that have worked on DOTS - good to work with
> > people who are clear thinkers, have good ideas and were prepared to
> > check out the practical usability in the real (but aggressive!)
> > world.
> >
> > I also will never stop being amazed at those for whom English was not
> > their first language being able to sort out (as someone who is
> > British and should know better) my incompressible grammar into
> > something that made even better sense.  Well done!
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Valery Smyslov [mailto: valery@smyslov.net]
> > > Sent: 27 March 2023 15:55
> > > To: dots@ietf.org
> > > Cc: dots-chairs@ietf.org; 'Paul Wouters'
> > > Subject: [Dots] Closing DOTS?
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > the DOTS WG has completed all its tasks according to the current
> > > charter (the last WG draft - telemetry use cases is in the RFC
> > Editor
> > > queue and will hopefully be published soon).
> > >
> > > Additionally, we don't have any new discussion on the list for
> > quite a
> > long time
> > > and we skipped 3 IETF meetings for this reason.
> > >
> > > The chairs discussed this with the responsible AD and we came to a
> > conclusion
> > > that it's time to close the group or recharter it if there is an
> > > interest in more work items related to DOTS.
> > >
> > > So, our question to the WG - should the group be closed?
> > > And if the answer is no, then what are new items the WG can work on
> > > after its recharter?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Valery (for chairs)
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Dots mailing list
> > > Dots@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dots mailing list
> > Dots@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez
> recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
> electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
> falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
> information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and
> delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
> modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dots mailing list
> Dots@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dots
>