Subject: [tsvwg] SCTP WG?

From: Martin Duke <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 11:15:15 -0700

TL;DR the preliminary BOF deadline is 10 September, and if there is genuine
interest in a large number of SCTP proposals, I would like to pencil in the
proponents now and get something in.

***********

Setting aside 4960bis, which is essentially done, here are the SCTP-related
drafts in tsvwg right now:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-natsupp/ which may or may
not move forward
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-over-sctp-bis/ just
got adopted
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dreibholz-tsvwg-sctp-nextgen-ideas/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dreibholz-tsvwg-sctpsocket-multipath/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dreibholz-tsvwg-sctpsocket-sqinfo/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-porfiri-tsvwg-sctp-natsupp/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tuexen-tsvwg-sctp-multipath/
and Michael Tuexen's talk at the interim today makes me think he has
another draft in him.

This is a lot of stuff -- more than enough to form its own working group,
and I'd like to keep tsvwg's bandwidth for true one-off things rather than
multi-document efforts. I don't care about the name at this point, but I
imagine this would not be a permanent working group.

So -- there are a few things I would very much like rapid feedback on --
rapid, i.e. by the middle of next week:
1. As an individual tsvwg member, do you see at least 3-4 documents in that
list that the IETF should adopt?
2. Are you willing to be a BoF proponent to help submit a proposal?
3. Are you willing to chair a BoF at IETF 112?

Thanks,
Martin

---

From: Martin Duke <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 11:51:14 -0700

To follow up on this email: after receiving some useful feedback, here is
the current status:

1) There is divided opinion for a separate WG
2) I am now convinced that there is no need for a BoF
3) It is not clear how many of the SCTP individual drafts will eventually
be adopted.

Thanks to point (2), there is no deadline associated with BoF submission on
Friday. Therefore, I invite the tsvwg community to consider the various
SCTP works in progress, as well as new drafts, holistically to see what is
interesting to pursue.

Obviously, the ultimate status of tswvg-natsupp, which is currently in IESG
Evaluation, will be part of this discussion.

Thanks,
Martin