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

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Mon, 16 September 2019 14:32 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 2B530120106 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 07:32:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 0f_qrGx0R3KJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 07:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B04AD120077 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 07:32:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1568644342; bh=fCLP8PvoF57zzwzA0gk3mZhnQtozbbcqiS+XlYGCm6k=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=j5TbcVaiekx7n6vIgV7VP5K0jCC83Wwju0gwZQ0XPH4K+5UcXHwpLRIDHpwQybvFq qw3FUj26PVLZCYrgdrhEi8yx3Qm9YUUc7Ay2VPoeRqH1pDyWhvPbrOmytJKBaUw/Ir ZmGSqqbA6Www9AF7MFDTc3ixst395mW6b/ufyPC8=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [192.168.1.34] ([5.10.171.186]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MtOGa-1iNXWC2nfi-00utSB; Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:32:22 +0200
Subject: Re: Planned experiment: A new mailing list for last-call discussions
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <F81AE7E530D4651A0806B087@PSB> <CALaySJL8zcbdue0+HpRQ0jE0HKNxuAkK6B+HZvsjyjc4vskOVg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <1078feb8-3aa8-de88-4b90-67666dfeb99f@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:32:22 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJL8zcbdue0+HpRQ0jE0HKNxuAkK6B+HZvsjyjc4vskOVg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:aCSk/gJgpA+ktYUcGue4/i4u8qWxTU3+VxqgTFyKuUZ5mes7oXf 39yfGkZnt5eyVzGgQC3tvWhN8/hVsrtv3dLsPhEWEJ1xC6dLrWgaBgAm8K7UkM3F+a6dH4A iIoiNbFO2+kDSJ5yFabNSpRPHf8ShxjEscvq2PpS1UCHJusOu5aSH2pb0PiIh+msaJxvBMt 86UyJC2hcGLqLusm7cAxQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:MHCHrI0a7Z0=:C1utsUXehT+QLLKcV1s/aW F+y36kBdgc40u2e1biSxLLx/DW2BOwsd0LDqozm+EBRxVEsMwN/j8bArKinjA/9ldmukiXRH5 QpfaLV5d8ToA5y7okIQID+fLB295qMPsLLZzQIDPRC3jZ97r1IDGSz3oQXtb7f25ZOJ9WAfTa Y93f36uFuUUkgW/E+D2kMEda4RVTUXiiY0SyJ/NUAPBVTBm1l9zNtnDpf9g24+XI1RLuPCryl NoxtzfAKggN+lwrcCMK2IsGy9fYBcfMQGYzhWxPQ1nTvQ/KkYpIZyJK2/loTLkQHy4TnD62k1 PNbJmYiG1XQjUDCY90Fq4DdwPH7PkrqIJCx8N5dKcFL4NDTXMjtwPYbVdK9gGr/L29x195bGg faAy6q6w3mk9SE+KskxYddNH1ZiGrZL77UvKkOd51lUyBavwJ/AbQHrfonb9CHl2wLY6s2pMl seYMu287OqEMWY9ifT5quXxiVsTpkyhAYRLHyMEm+hPlSCs8tNNaZhPwWTe3nd7dVP/fug/6i s/jcSWl6hjbEYrfXPAXPJQkm+fBFdcOeRpyyz7qakCY4IXdOL3mp+zQdoKcn0ECZFA778Ahc4 2TZmhGBvbb12CA/Wu6p04bkfC3EZtoH+7PwcEogk+bE5795UNhNLLh+N1gUIgp935W9wIlLKk AE+3M8GlEwhBWt5uiBitPkm/3qxlvxpXRc+YEWHkqdGcLBwp9QcEXVMmDNTtytpRdNP9y/ZWP nlPuXLlq7wy0UyCvBUPzKDvjpry+187LxNWl04QR/vfjBYkTkzkEK6JIKgX6tgjrr9UFV5LIw TpMH1/gJxmTXI3wQGwI8j5fSxa62HtKfrVyXsfgtb5sgwe/KZKI+Y07IYgJF4DWqALcImhDs3 0kJonmMsEbQjDuD6QDEsAnigJ2Q03HKGSIjHteJ8wCI9CVJXgjaXrLuAXX4IXDaSdPYGW5eu2 vohESsr8cx7DfFDNToHvi/TCoFJZCSz/e/0/LmEigpCVNzL3dvmyAJQpWcXiR1mRZtiNqIfm2 3jswwFJDQwZuZOU/h2yJtj2VbKYblw9MzfmPgN7FwMXwXYkhJjWEQHJrQXBXLhMLajOb8s0lK EUFZ8Ng9DFe4m7HKsKiRGVEraLx+bdKD1/0bi06VcXiWEV7qCUmZtSHxSF00n/C3pF5zL8nc+ gNYNGpQ0vkDg+pS8dThMZIr/h8PR8CTfJ+UrbptipLpcuhtFuUKaeAQGx2j+U+flcydHgdy5z XPYZYhDO+6HYQha/IwQwV6SSMi5k8OYwRPu+G95QDu0wM8U+RkebLYeKVRhs=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/203mTr7ZqLiM993BsDv8ECTbmk0>
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: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 14:32:39 -0000

On 16.09.2019 16:15, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Hi, John,
>
>> But, again, my concern is that we get the best cross-area
>> reviews possible and reach IETF consensus on that basis, not
>> that WG participation and consensus within the WG is unimportant.
>
> Indeed, John, and I understand and agree with that.
>
> I think the issue is that you (and a few others) are concerned that if
> we move last-call discussion to another list, fewer people will follow
> that list, and, therefore, fewer people will be exposed to the
> last-call discussions and possibly be moved to join some of them.
>
> On the other hand, others, including the people who suggested the
> split in the first place, think that actually *more* people will be
> likely to pay attention to the last-call discussion if they're on a
> mailing list that's separate from the high-volume that is the IETF
> Discussion list.
>
> As these are both valid views and we don't know which is correct, it
> seems to me that the only way to find out what will *actually* happen
> will be to run the experiment.  Do you know another way?

Good points.

I wonder whether we actually should dedicate the new list to *anything*
that is about IETF consensus, not only last calls (so the idea would be:
"important things go here").

Best regards, Julian