Re: [arch-d] iesg: Re: Updates on IAB mailing lists

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Mon, 20 April 2020 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024F73A10C4; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.904
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 LDJBHjzkhham; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:39:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F4893A10C2; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:39:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5F3C548048; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 23:39:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id DD0F9440041; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 23:39:05 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 23:39:05 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
Cc: Mary Barnes <mary.ietf.barnes@gmail.com>, Tommy Pauly <tpauly=40apple.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IETF-Discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, "architecture-discuss@ietf.org" <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <20200420213905.GA19381@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <20200420184456.GG5351@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <c8c9947a-9fa5-e208-6560-01f31067a590@gmail.com> <CAHBDyN6b_GFDaxRj1v4n==NjZJMXt11sBSsRcik7R1b0kN4yUA@mail.gmail.com> <93a7ae7f-c2bc-a009-baa9-8671de5ee384@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <93a7ae7f-c2bc-a009-baa9-8671de5ee384@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/n95rfLOfFuc96Xqj29uCXSI2uDg>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] iesg: Re: Updates on IAB mailing lists
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:39:13 -0000

Melinda,

The current description of the list is very clear and very useful,
and well defines whats in and whats out of scope. It should not
be changed or amended by new rules as proposed by the current IAB.

Whoever sponsors the list, IAB or else, if it is an @ietf.org
mailing list, it should follow what we have come to expect to
be appropriate for IETF. When the IAB wants to have more constrained
mailing lists, which may make perfect sense for other lists, they
can have them under @iab.org. architecture-discuss@ietf.org was
specifically set up there to indicate its an IETF community mailing list
thats also explicitly what the description says. The IETF community
does not operate under IAB rules.

Cheers
    Toerless

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:52:00AM -0800, Melinda Shore wrote:
> On 4/20/20 11:49 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
> > Personally, I think it's a handy list to have
> > for purely technical discussions as opposed to all the non-technical
> > discussions on the main IETF discussion list. 
> 
> Right, but I think it's clear that it's not every technical
> discussion, which circles back around to Toerless's argument.
> 
> Melinda

-- 
---
tte@cs.fau.de