Session Date/Time: 14 Nov 2023 16:00

TAPS

Summary

The TAPS working group met to finalize the "interface", "architecture" (arch), and "implementation" (imple) drafts in light of recent IESG reviews and comments. The group confirmed that all outstanding GitHub issues and Pull Requests (PRs) had been addressed and merged. Key discussions revolved around the strategy for replying to IESG "discuss" comments, particularly for the draft-ietf-taps-interface document, and coordinating the publication process with the IESG Shepherd and the Working Group chairs. The "interface" draft was tagged as revision 23.

Key Discussion Points

Draft Readiness: The group noted that there were very few remaining open issues or PRs, indicating the drafts were largely complete from a working group perspective. It was confirmed that Tommy and Colin had addressed the final pending PRs, with Colin completing the last three significant ones.
IESG Discuss Comments: A significant portion of the meeting focused on how to respond to the IESG "discuss" comments, specifically for the draft-ietf-taps-interface document, which still had four outstanding discusses (from Roman, Eric Klein, Loris, and Paul ERS).
- The group decided that individual replies would be crafted for each discusser, linking to the relevant PRs and providing a brief sentence explaining how their comments were addressed.
- Following these individual replies, the "interface" draft Shepherd, Anna, would send a summary email to the IESG, requesting a re-ballot on the updated document.
"imple" and "arch" Draft Status: It was confirmed that the draft-ietf-taps-imple document had cleared its IESG ballot. For draft-ietf-taps-arch, a minor capitalization PR was merged, but a decision was made not to re-tag it immediately for this minor change due to GitHub's handling of tags on the same commit, considering the RFC Editor would likely handle such fixes.
Working Group Review Period: In anticipation of the next IESG telechat (scheduled for end of November), the chairs discussed issuing a two-week review period for the entire working group to look at the updated drafts. This would allow the working group to review all changes made in response to IESG feedback before the IESG's reconsideration. This was framed as a robust final check rather than a formal Working Group Last Call.
Finality of Work: There was a general sense that the working group had addressed all known issues and brought the drafts as far as possible, acknowledging that further IESG or RFC Editor feedback might lead to minor additional revisions.

Decisions and Action Items

Decision: Merge the outstanding capitalization PR for draft-ietf-taps-interface.
Decision: Tag draft-ietf-taps-interface as revision 23. (Brian)
Action Item: Brian, Roman, and Ryan to draft and send individual replies to the IESG discussers for draft-ietf-taps-interface (Roman, Paul ERS, Eric Klein). These replies should link to relevant PRs and explain how comments were addressed. Michael (in absentia) was assigned Lars's comments.
Action Item: Anna (Shepherd for draft-ietf-taps-interface) to send a summary email to the IESG once individual replies are complete, requesting a re-ballot for draft-ietf-taps-interface. This email should also briefly mention updates to draft-ietf-taps-arch and draft-ietf-taps-imple.
Action Item: Aaron (Chair) to send an email to the TAPS mailing list announcing the updated drafts (all three), highlighting that changes were made in response to IESG feedback, and requesting the working group to review them for any issues within two weeks.
Decision: Do not immediately re-tag draft-ietf-taps-arch for the minor capitalization fix; this can be handled by the RFC Editor or in a future revision if other changes are needed.

Next Steps

Individual replies to IESG discussers for draft-ietf-taps-interface will be drafted and sent.
The TAPS working group mailing list will be notified of the updated drafts and requested to provide feedback within two weeks.
The Shepherd will notify the IESG of the revised drafts and request their re-ballot, aiming for consideration at the next IESG telechat.
The working group will await further feedback from both the IESG and the mailing list, though no further major revisions are anticipated at this stage.