Re: Planned experiment: A new mailing list for last-call discussions

"Pete Resnick" <resnick@episteme.net> Sat, 14 September 2019 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53CCC1200CE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 09:55:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 A46SYJA0Z231 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 09:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF84C1200CD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 09:55:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 708548CA07AF; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:55:31 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Duo4fSLiCvpC; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:55:30 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [172.16.1.18] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4369E8CA07A5; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:55:30 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Pete Resnick" <resnick@episteme.net>
To: "S Moonesamy" <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: "Barry Leiba" <barryleiba@computer.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Planned experiment: A new mailing list for last-call discussions
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2019 11:55:29 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.5r5635)
Message-ID: <91194B51-317E-42C8-8C79-4FD48768B09A@episteme.net>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20190913131837.0bfc7720@elandsys.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20190913131837.0bfc7720@elandsys.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-5pa8qYUUWVGAt1-FOFAmvkISF8>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2019 16:55:36 -0000

On 13 Sep 2019, at 17:35, S Moonesamy wrote:

> I followed the plenary meeting during which a few persons suggested 
> that the Last Call messages be moved to another mailing list due to 
> the volume of emails unrelated to Last Calls.  The number of monthly 
> Last Call emails is usually in the single digits.

SM, I think you misunderstood the point of the new list. It's not for 
Last Call announcements; it's for Last Call discussion (i.e., individual 
Last Call comments, area review team reviews, and all of their 
respective replies). Those messages number 50 to 100 per month. Moving 
those messages to a separate list is the experiment.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick http://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best