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

Stephen Farrell <> Tue, 30 March 2021 11:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A9983A0D8E for <>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:49:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KdIpAx56sT-Y for <>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93AC43A0D91 for <>; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 04:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A519FBE3E; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:49:17 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hxQ_pFe1a6CC; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:49:16 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CD41CBE2D; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:49:15 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=mail; t=1617104956; bh=jRGvog7bLpMlQIahjISGEppyt53nVA62OLQHaGhaCG8=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=V46naZ7+S7tWRABJvjqs/E83z/8wIkYNSez+c37Nb42Wa0BZjEYtupG2ncDqi2mO8 iKQTSpqiECHK2HblvtbenyzGbhd8MLLl2WS4V+30GwfFgAL5XNpxy5aLwYlsuZaqMk B38Q88g2ROcIT/z12ETQWoJmy0ISWuAvnX3geIr8=
To: Lars Eggert <>, Eliot Lear <>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <>,
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Stephen Farrell <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:49:15 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-eggert-bcp45bis-01.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 11:49:26 -0000


On 30/03/2021 12:33, Lars Eggert wrote:
> I think draft-nottingham-discussion-recharter makes a pretty
> convincing case  isn't a general list for the IETF
> community (= the "union" I mentioned above), and probably hasn't been
> for quite some time.

I don't agree that Mark's draft is convincing. I do think
the topics raised are interesting and warrant debate some
place/time, but I don't really agree with the fundamental
ideas that representation and productivity are the most
important characteristics for our broadest discussion venue.

That said, the draft in the subject line doesn't go there
and is fine.

My only quibble with draft-eggert-bcp45bis is that the
opening sentence from section 2 ("This list is meant for
initial technical discussion only.") is badly phrased
and contradicted by later text. I think it'd be better to
say "This list is not meant for detailed technical
discussion that belongs on a WG list or on it's own list,
once such a list exists." (Or, just delete the first
sentence as it's not needed.)