IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tap] RFC Status?

Gaurav Vaidya <gaurav@ggvaidya.com> Mon, 11 August 2014 19:07 UTC

Return-Path: <ggvaidya@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A87611A00EA for <tap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:07:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nr7ES7QXg-3r for <tap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x22d.google.com (mail-ig0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B990D1A007F for <tap@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-f173.google.com with SMTP id h18so4797109igc.0 for <tap@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=wgxwCaeKxHtuWxIgEvkrwl6BrFU0lNlbFG/2Gbrr/wo=; b=iEZgVyddP3HHX0Ajoc2basUBTYerymePjGB9Ab92wXCr0TmeND7d5oPfHsEo5/D/j7 wo7QBJlDozvaGU0f/dVweThf+IFAAX9/3bR4OjqBOiQVVxqc8LQDtYcfLdi9mXXT4Mnv Wlnz6keJdDqbAUGMURqfr1VIunv/ukoAVAB30VS4ZmGEe/fgAaxYtr7G+7w2WFx6ZwS3 9OwvfPoYpAto4f6OgFZngZ2FNvdVyMGCYcp2fXrBAJefD72PGSLkdZOTdlcintgWbVxv 4Om1Eb98YHuHNkRSapbQYifmn1DZgt+xcjUthb63ELYlIvofmYN1xeatIwhDyosd9ih+ zWoA==
X-Received: by 10.42.198.75 with SMTP id en11mr34546796icb.7.1407784072144; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rgnt2-118-209-dhcp.int.colorado.edu (ucb-np2-226.colorado.edu. [128.138.65.226]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b8sm51516885igl.5.2014.08.11.12.07.51 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 12:07:51 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Gaurav Vaidya <ggvaidya@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Gaurav Vaidya <gaurav@ggvaidya.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP4gcszybVr5Hw3mg=uTi8tqpA3wEVwo=zf2876RWhy_CmozZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:07:50 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7250AD76-F5DF-494C-8A00-B4320053EBE7@ggvaidya.com>
References: <CAP4gcszybVr5Hw3mg=uTi8tqpA3wEVwo=zf2876RWhy_CmozZw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew de Andrade <andrew@deandrade.com.br>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tap/Kpiv5xs8aqf7yx8D5iCNsomKrA4
Cc: tap@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tap] RFC Status?
X-BeenThere: tap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Test Anything Protocol WG discussions <tap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tap/>
List-Post: <mailto:tap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 19:07:56 -0000

Hi Andrew!

On 11 Aug, 2014, at 12:42 pm, Andrew de Andrade <andrew@deandrade.com.br> wrote:
> While thinking about this, I decided to go out and figure out if there is such a thing as nested TAP in the protocol specification. While searching for this, I came across this group, which is a great, but it appears there has been no activity here in a while and it looks like all the wiki pages with prior information about the state of the TAP protocol becoming an IETF RFC have disappeared. 
> 
> What's the current state of TAP? Is there still interest in taking this to RFC status? I found some previous discussions on the list about nested TAP. Did those make it into the specification in any way? If so, where can I find examples of correct nested tap results?
The most recent version of the spec I could find was at https://github.com/gaurav/test-anything-protocol/blob/master/output/draft-vaidya-test-anything-protocol-00.txt, but this doesn’t talk about nesting at all. I’ve been out of the loop for a long, long time for graduate school reasons, but I think I remember someone (Ovid?) writing up a spec for nested TAP elsewhere?

cheers,
Gaurav

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email