Re: Changes to the way we manage RFPs

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Wed, 26 February 2020 22:09 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
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 3D78A3A08E9; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:09:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 lcqXRfulyLKb; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:09:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-il1-f179.google.com (mail-il1-f179.google.com [209.85.166.179]) (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 850EF3A08EB; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:09:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-il1-f179.google.com with SMTP id f5so565120ilq.5; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:09:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4Md5KXXcbt9kQENdqYfYPF1k4dexsCGkKrMINYFNgcI=; b=QkYvuUo8aQOQKO4U/ydviqR8/lahBs/z8otEKPZlJYs2OylQNKRZQfMxpwinoLMtgV 4dacHyei/xHoI6KjM9NkRtcz+N8IST4apPUPOuavHsQmlJMfIKA5VhpNm021L0gzs58S mH6QlCBCGTUFRo2k5MhBH7LLOnK65+zGFIOp5jp2XIrCd2+o6ZRb64Ep1E8I/yz0AiZx kuwEQ2v1godv3cdmBl/N5pzpXJZe/j1DmeR+G0i60TBd19UVwg7QdUFge3/KvlfaN07D YUwo0XHH2GQUCLXOIapgbsjxregTE06rdYq4jF6N3wQ0Yo1OyydIymQ7cKKEh3797wsF NOow==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXc4/JcWpJjU3pqpXHxLt3hD+W0abGPoibvlkpy0LdSSfAb8An5 7noYNsERG2mC3dSaKjU+VPNTUj6awvNDvdkpWJPRRQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwVQnYRUj4gT5WoO7F84JfAvohlK/k1v9ouJ4jJVB3q5VKmQReBtriCzJykioTbS6qZcBJaNjzX00yA5u3E9/8=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:d3cc:: with SMTP id c12mr1026229ilh.266.1582754963446; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:09:23 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <52c88899-8f4e-c92e-d147-e5437c903467@gmail.com> <8AB21B37-3B6F-4BCF-BF35-FB57639FDF8C@ietf.org> <13032.1582721936@localhost> <CAC4RtVDCPPMi_3Y-PDK4pALhCDeWkx5RiR+jOuS2Oj_KkuSz3Q@mail.gmail.com> <09234B6B-1CB6-4063-BBD0-9CE30701CD45@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <09234B6B-1CB6-4063-BBD0-9CE30701CD45@ietf.org>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:09:12 -0800
Message-ID: <CALaySJLwjcM+TCWcQA4wn+FiVxh_qtgstm2hpxwD-2Q2ctBH4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Changes to the way we manage RFPs
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/4KH3QaNfkuYltQLpPO_0hm_uKxc>
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 22:09:37 -0000

My suggestion isn't to copy them to ietf@ietf.org, but, rather, to
copy them to ietf-announce@ietf.org.

b

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 2:02 PM Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks Barry
>
> On 27/02/2020, at 10:58 AM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:59 AM Michael Richardson
> <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>
>
> The ietf-lastcall split has been good for ietf-announce volume, but
>
>
> But here's the thing: That split should have not affected the volume
> on ietf-announce *at all*.  It should have reduced volume on
> <ietf@ietf.org>rg>, which is a very different thing.  This isn't the
> message thread to discuss that further, but I mention it here to lead
> into agreement with some other comments:
>
> I believe that having a new "rfp-announce" list is a fine thing *if*
> RFC announcements are posted to *both* ietf-announce and rfc-announce.
> That should satisfy all the concerns here: those who subscribe to
> ietf-announce need to change nothing and will still get RFP
> announcements, and those who only want RFC announcements and not the
> other stuff can subscribe only to rfp-announce -- it's an individual
> choice.
>
>
> In order to close this thread I will cc: ietf@ietf on all posts to rfp-announce, which is trivial to do.
>
> Jay
>
>
> Barry
>
>
> --
> Jay Daley
> IETF Executive Director
> jay@ietf.org
> +64 21 678840
>