[Taps] Heads-up: Should we conclude TAPS after the three docs are done?

Reese Enghardt <ietf@tenghardt.net> Wed, 15 March 2023 15:35 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@tenghardt.net>
X-Original-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0981C14CEF9; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 08:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tenghardt.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QzKNnQM3heFg; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 08:35:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hemio.de (mail.hemio.de [136.243.12.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF859C14F748; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 08:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from user.client.invalid (localhost [136.243.12.180]) by mail.hemio.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28E13B4; Wed, 15 Mar 2023 16:35:29 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=tenghardt.net; s=20170414; t=1678894530; bh=ctcccZFSTTyJm9MlC94tHNK9nEZMFkaCg2lgm9JfMps=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:From; b=YhKqTD9QiGyt8LCHVMlNepYrp24l/ccFdYhLRl6BommH7u7ba5TfS2TPBdGL+dbJn 0ImgFPCW3Tv34uS+TNaMyG20FCyOGTr1SYEvIJNj+uUi/bRmz/vyniAXqaRb6gq36C qaw4gwtdXhM2Yd3HS8pIdD0tIqflnwtqslwc0mJNiOJ3qvynxNZi9fWw8vUaQaa6wU 9/Ne4V2qnRaI2x7Yyr2S1mgOBmJyYPR1NR7vvWjiBfScb2ALZ8jhTWOQygEBJJMLDa bP5BsJn6BQZWUjQapfFGobTy8WqsbbqULUCIMa2LpW+rDwrdpIB0WH3X1iwIMUp2GN y+j8/jdB2fuUg==
Message-ID: <01ee447f-7608-703f-31cf-12dfaa68df1f@tenghardt.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 08:35:28 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: "taps@ietf.org" <taps@ietf.org>
From: Reese Enghardt <ietf@tenghardt.net>
Cc: "taps-chairs@ietf.org" <taps-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/Sojgf6tyklhYNJtRxt_WLvD-s4Q>
Subject: [Taps] Heads-up: Should we conclude TAPS after the three docs are done?
X-BeenThere: taps@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF Transport Services \(TAPS\) Working Group" <taps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/taps>, <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/taps/>
List-Post: <mailto:taps@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps>, <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 15:35:37 -0000

Dear TAPS,

As we are moving towards finishing the three core documents, the next 
step will be to recharter or conclude.

We have talked about possible further milestones related to mapping 
documents, and we have a few related issues on the Github 
(https://github.com/ietf-tapswg/api-drafts/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Amappings). 


However, we have not seen much activity on this topic since IETF 113, 
and we have no related currently active documents.

I wanted to give you a heads-up that, given this state, the chairs are 
wondering if it'll be time to conclude TAPS once the core documents have 
made their way to the RFC Editor, unless we see evidence of substantial 
interest and activity regarding further milestones.

Nothing has been decided yet, and we will be happy to discuss this question.

TAPS is not meeting at IETF 116, but we can consider scheduling a 
virtual interim meeting or a WG meeting at IETF 117 if we have content 
for a fruitful discussion.

Please let me know your thoughts.

Best,
Reese