IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Taps] Should TAPS meet during IETF-108?

Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com> Tue, 26 May 2020 16:46 UTC

Return-Path: <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com>
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 A72B13A0A92; Tue, 26 May 2020 09:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.com
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 h7wHlTne0mwQ; Tue, 26 May 2020 09:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr20072.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.2.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF3BC3A0A4A; Tue, 26 May 2020 09:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ShA8du1HSX+4wpaZ5jdJ9Z/xbSHc4M8Oxto9+KJRk0G38xsiz5yhdL1Wv7/lDt85c54NRiGYDCCQoJpOzk5UXlMwO5renD5il1t8aHHDMTIqZMFo+efVSGlNcVowIl30lk/wL/2q08Alff5YfaX1m5tRuT1xWQ/FaizA16XMqonpr0o5Pr+KJwr6HkQ9TU6TqBK8QW6WlGZTfq7kxuVJTbUP6muat0R6CRw+i3h1FixHxbe41CJ8603LWhacdGMkLNWwAFyXIJK+1Kv+DvStqub/FF7/rervovuCw/GttTEN7J6k8bwqXXc0guaer6pg0ghYC5yeZ7bXclqCsr13YQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=bC1izQ1lMfFCgXVBzy52yi4qlpZYhUFB5vizuL5CGnA=; b=dktA4ZtWsi2T2QOUUcSlSvnxnrOIiPLukd6/J7jTmkfuOEZMHbVq/wnIdJT24tJk46pLJzuM9rSoCuho1h3LsYRw6gxd7i+uK3uNe5Usx9GO8zmHUmfGi4m6/+bVCLFL53rdJw0knDX40yZVKKxuC83ySG9S2IACoiDFednwSYcl75L9wo31Zb9zhEx1JmN1J1shYZLQISm/N0fsTRJaWPzKGECI30iCFol3zdwQrWmRd8DUuUjRV20INQOs+JrJnJhYANXZ9uEz+SXoFa6RFKMtPfp6D0ZfjaoBNTX+K1BdrcWZsWDdzV53eyToacyQvPyS93ldA+zyOCBcD2a+lg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=bC1izQ1lMfFCgXVBzy52yi4qlpZYhUFB5vizuL5CGnA=; b=j74Wj7dmYSiKTVEwwlKO68ENQOjNRnqNID8itg6FgfAbPHMvPphmGftvTKmWV4gB3dSWAZamqt20au+0dTjRIRw0wOehrGr7U4QAtxiW6Iu0MNJkrc420NQnqkgW9V8JN3KB+GTqsMK40GQs5zUN4v9TODNDSXLzr5GqvOj+uGw=
Received: from AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:208:75::30) by AM0PR07MB4002.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:208:4c::24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2979.21; Tue, 26 May 2020 16:46:01 +0000
Received: from AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d8e:b09e:d5be:3f89]) by AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::d8e:b09e:d5be:3f89%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3045.009; Tue, 26 May 2020 16:46:00 +0000
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com>
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
CC: "taps-ads@ietf.org" <taps-ads@ietf.org>, taps WG <taps@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Taps] Should TAPS meet during IETF-108?
Thread-Index: AQHWM2huaLTbp7FfcEm4d102Y1nYfqi6iWMAgAArmAA=
Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 16:46:00 +0000
Message-ID: <9D0C0117-DC7B-4547-961B-3FCBA3F3051D@ericsson.com>
References: <5A720526-CFF7-4F88-9BC3-2132A4412DFE@gmail.com> <CAM4esxQ019r9rGppsDxPwi-2RSKFM1cPBYxocXZKAy-ZAuTb8Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAM4esxQ019r9rGppsDxPwi-2RSKFM1cPBYxocXZKAy-ZAuTb8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.37.20051002
authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com;
x-originating-ip: [2003:de:e700:7a00:34b7:a0f7:1c2:e982]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 196eb65e-ea43-4b45-c1bc-08d8019445bd
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM0PR07MB4002:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <AM0PR07MB4002AB11F0E98BEB56549ACEF4B00@AM0PR07MB4002.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7691;
x-forefront-prvs: 041517DFAB
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: aV6d++RC9cqmA+AKNaa1tmZe9uwUUegc35xDqnypUfu6yv3xeifyN+nZWzqPyQiuYavjaxTnZ5HhS7bYyjF4kSsr7uU9vkz8s0CH9VAdFFS0qY8cOuDfCAy88TFUDFs/nJB0xq8KdEQWDbY/zJWqulyoj8YLagVzCIFDx5l/pypCiUfn6Soorja7ZzOV8AycDCq/igHutA2cquhZzItEPpCeiQSDBnV7LkVKHz1M+mYHWqU9nScGqDIZnidsRaQk9o6z7mSx0YyLilcS1hYC6V8r993Q0o4Q8npIGBBHcQ1/TKO97xOF+XZrEdC22IczBemqmfnAhpo3al1ymwQlVlefVEuw5xiY+cJVWMuX/EC4azxqI1vfB+iWGi4UdLH2xCE0cnkXYBE38MI06G2aszyDtod9iLwodWUOUeV6uo8YTbv7bz1OkYT5roQCqNZe
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:AM0PR07MB4691.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(6506007)(66476007)(8936002)(64756008)(66446008)(66946007)(44832011)(66556008)(2906002)(4326008)(76116006)(71200400001)(53546011)(86362001)(54906003)(6486002)(498600001)(110136005)(8676002)(36756003)(6512007)(186003)(2616005)(5660300002)(33656002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9D0C0117DC7B4547961B3FCBA3F3051Dericssoncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 196eb65e-ea43-4b45-c1bc-08d8019445bd
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 May 2020 16:46:00.8177 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: RaYjR9XLcaInQGhi44e8Vp2n80bL1DriukeL9hUtJzN5TmZSOsS9bR2g3t1xKSFnq3q9e/TCArjPvuQxGqoz1T+ANRNKs0iedh0xRyQtjaM=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AM0PR07MB4002
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/hRXPUupf2dJBiiEr5i-3-EpcjSw>
Subject: Re: [Taps] Should TAPS meet during IETF-108?
X-BeenThere: taps@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 26 May 2020 16:46:07 -0000

Hi Martin, hi all,

I agree that your points listed below are usually good reasons for a wg meeting. In case of taps I think we reached a working mode where we really try to fix github issue and get the docs ready for wglc. This might be less interesting for “tourists” and we probably won’t really have proceedings. So I’m happy to move this out of the IETF week. Ideally we would be mostly done even before the 108 meeting 😊 However, not sure where we are with the implementation draft…?

Mirja



From: Taps <taps-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, 26. May 2020 at 18:08
To: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>
Cc: "taps-ads@ietf.org" <taps-ads@ietf.org>, taps WG <taps@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Taps] Should TAPS meet during IETF-108?

Frankly, I can’t think of a good reason to do so.

Although I don't have a strong opinion on this question, the reasons to participate in 108 proper are:
- full support for meetecho, archiving, proceedings, etc
- more participation from "tourists" who have already adjusted their schedules for that week
- scheduling that ensures the remote meeting time moves around during the year, meaning it's not always scheduled for the convenience of the usual suspects.

If that's not compelling for the WG, that's fine with me.
Martin

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 7:17 AM Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com<mailto:aaron.falk@gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear TAPS working group & ADs,

Scheduling has begun for the online IETF-108 meeting in July. Should we request a meeting slot for IETF week? Frankly, I can’t think of a good reason to do so. We’ve been making good progress with ~monthly Webex sessions and my hope is to continue them. Trying to schedule a meeting during IETF week will only reduce availability of participants. Thoughts?

--aaron

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email