Re: [BEHAVE] Closing the mailing list

BEHAVE's most impactful work, NAT64 and DNS64, have finished and cause little-to-no discussion.  The related important work, 464xlat, was in v6ops because BEHAVE had closed by then.  The issues of ALGs remains but fortunately the strong trend towards encryption prevents ALGs from harming protocol enhancements.  The big take-away from BEHAVE is adding more technical workarounds to patch over inadequate endpoints builds more fragile systems. I have brought that learning into other protocols and into my day job.  TSVWG is a great place to continue any NAT- or BEHAVE-related topics, as necessary.

Thanks to everyone for the opportunity I received to co-chair BEHAVE for several years.

-d

> On Jan 10, 2020, at 4:00 PM, Dave Thaler <dthaler=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> The Behave WG was closed 7 years ago and documents moved to other groups like TRAM (WG still open)
> and PCP (WG now also closed), or the transport area list.
> 
> This list had some discussion up through 2018 or so, but since then has had no substantial discussions.
> In the past year there have only been 3 messages, all of which came from the AD and got no responses.
> 
> Most messages to the behave list are spam that I have to deal with frequently so others don't.
> 
> I don't see that this list has provided any real value in over a year so I have no objection to closing it
> and redirecting any future queries to another list (whether TRAM or TSVWG or whatever else).
> 
> Dave Thaler
> List Moderator and (former) Behave chair
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Behave <behave-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2020 7:47 AM
> To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>; Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>; behave@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] Closing the mailing list
> 
> 
> Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
>> Whats the benefit of closing the list ? If someone has calculated that
>> the 20 KByte of disk space required to maintain it on IETF servers costs
>> 50 cents/quarter, i am happy to shoulder that cost.
> 
> I also don't know why we close lists for WGs that have documents in the wild.
> The result is that we can't process errata.  If you get stream of unsubscribes are a result of this thread, fine, people have sorted themselves.
> 
> --
> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
> ]     mcr@sandelman.ca  https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sandelman.ca%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cdthaler%40microsoft.com%7C234ad8b79b024142066408d795e44ea1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637142680646046670&amp;sdata=GFpyb7XoX%2BWJqZrjsSsWRa8SfGSuLxYB4FK1VnRbaOI%3D&amp;reserved=0        |   ruby on rails    [
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Behave mailing list
> Behave@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave