Re: [Taps] Taps working group status and way forward

+1 … thanks a whole lot to everyone, it’s been a fun ride!

For some nostalgia, more detailed history is here:  https://sites.google.com/site/transportprotocolservices/home <https://sites.google.com/site/transportprotocolservices/home>
Preceding the two BoFs on this page, and not even documented there, there was also a bar BoF.

I second Zahed’s statement about industrial applications - I also very much share the hope of developers utilizing the true potential!  Fingers crossed for some good stuff happening after this is over!

But, a tiny bit of work is still ahead…

Cheers,
Michael

> On Nov 13, 2023, at 8:19 PM, Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Zahed.  It's been a long road and I'm gratified the (publication) end is in sight.  The TAPS BoF was scheduled in January 2014 so it's been just about exactly a decade this work has been in the IETF.  Thanks to all for your longtime commitment to this effort.
> 
> --aaron
> 
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 8:43 AM Zaheduzzaman Sarker <zahed.sarker.ietf@gmail.com <mailto:zahed.sarker.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hello working group,
> 
> It is a great pleasure to see that the final deliverables under our current charter have been worked out and moved to the final stages of publication. The three documents - architecture, interface and implementation, are in IESG evaluation. The comments and discusses are being addressed and hopefully we will approve them soon. 
> 
> We also have been discussing potential new works and rechartering of this working group for a while. Those discussions didn't really create huge interest and enthusiasm to take in new works. One of the prominent idea was about QUIC mapping on TAPS. I have talked with those were interested, and my view is that we need more motivation to do that, especially as the QUIC implementation and improvements are still undergoing, this has to be motivated from QUIC implementers point of views that the QUIC mapping will be used and required. From that point of view, if the interest grows in future then QUIC working group would be best place to do that, or we can create a working group just to focus on that deliverable. 
> 
> With the current status of this working group, I don't see any need for rechartering now and I have decided to close this working group after the current three documents are published. This means, we will not take any new working group item under the current charter. The working group will remain open till we publish the architecture, interface and implementation documents.
> 
> I am proud of the works that have been done in TAPS working group and looking forward to see TAPS in action in the industrial implementations. Let's hope the developers utilizes the true potential of TAPS standards.
> 
> I would like to take this opportunities to thank all the working group participants and chairs and previous AD for doing a great job.
> 
> Please feel free to send any feedback to me.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Zahed
> Your responsible transport AD
> 
>       
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> Taps@ietf.org <mailto:Taps@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps>
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> Taps@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps