Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-eggert-bcp45bis-01.txt

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 30-Mar-21 20:05, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> On 2021-3-29, at 22:59, Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> *  Questions and clarifications concerning IETF meetings, although
>>> most of these topics are better brought up on the discussion list
>>> for IETF LLC administrative issues [ADMIN-DISCUSS] or the attendee
>>> discussion list for a given IETF meeting, such as
>>> [IETF110-ATTENDEES] for IETF-110.
>>
>> However, since not everybody attends IETF meetings, and therefore
>> not everybody is on the attendee lists, we should be clear that
>> messages like "we are going to discuss the very interesting topic X
>> at the next IETF meeting" do IMHO still belong on the IETF list. The
>> previous bullet in the draft already says this, but maybe we could
>> reove any doubt by having this bullet start:
>>
>> * Questions and clarifications concerning practical aspects of IETF meetings...
> 
> 
> If the intent is to makes sure that people are aware of relevant discussions, even if they're not on one of the attendee lists (and I usually decline that), it might be better to use ietf-announce@ -- e.g., in a "rollup" e-mail before the meeting, where submissions are solicited ahead of time. Or with an open calendar / wiki space (we rely on e-mail to much for stateful things anyway).

Sure, if it's an "official" topic that somebody with posting rights for -announce decides to publicise.
 
> Again, ietf@ should _not_ be the default place for announcing things. It is a subset of the community.

But it's the list that anybody can write to about possibly heretical ideas, including people outside the leadership bubble. (Also, BTW, ietf-announce is a shockingly small subset of the community. A lot of people apparently limit themselves to specific IETF echo chambers.)

On that topic, my own experience is that twice in my life, I have stopped reading ietf@ for about a year - once when I stepped down from the IAB, and once when I stepped down from the IESG. Both times, I felt like a break from the rather weird threads that sometimes develop there. Both times, I rejoined because I don't know a better way to hear what's on people's minds.

Regards
   Brian