I'm glad we did this work, but the energy here has gotten pretty low and I
wonder if it's worth doing extensions if there's exactly 1 deployment of
any significance.

Furthermore, if the only thing people are excited about is a QUIC mapping,
I'd rather we just do it in QUICWG than have the overhead of a WG for this.

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 12:26 PM Devon H. O'Dell <dhobsd=
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Most of my questions / comments / contributions have been about
> discoverability / configuration, and I wondered if there'd be interest in
> exploring the policy and configuration space for Transport Services. I'm
> thinking along the lines of APIs for configuration tools to manage or
> discover policy (e.g. enumerate local endpoints, gather properties, collect
> / set resolver configurations). My apologies for having missed the last
> several meetings, but would love to discuss this at the next interim.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> --dho
>
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 11:35 AM Reese Enghardt <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taps mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
>
_______________________________________________
Taps mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps

Reply via email to