Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: unbearable

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Fri, 05 December 2014 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F07C01AD6CE; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 11:49:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.61
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 t5fFse-1echl; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 11:49:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E5CC1AD6D0; Fri, 5 Dec 2014 11:49:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from h8.int.jck.com ([198.252.137.35] helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1Xwyss-000PHG-Uw; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 14:49:46 -0500
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 14:49:41 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: iesg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: unbearable
Message-ID: <78D3914CE51C76BA75D82940@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <20141205191820.4189.348.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20141205191820.4189.348.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.35
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/71jhlS_dNj7YSrfk1pXVqNQRC2g
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 19:49:51 -0000

As a member of or sympathizer with various societies for bear
encouragement and preservation (black, brown, polar, Cub Scouts,
Teddy, Pooh, ... in no particular order), I find this name
really objectionable.  From the description, "unbearerable"
might have been better, "betterbearer" certainly would have been.

"unbearable" should be reserved for April 1 RFCs and similar
work efforts :-)

I wonder if anyone has ever appealed a mailing list name.

unbearably yours,
    john


--On Friday, December 05, 2014 11:18 -0800 IETF Secretariat
<ietf-secretariat@ietf.org> wrote:

> A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
> 
> List address: unbearable@ietf.org
> Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/unbearable/
> To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unbearable
> 
> Purpose:
> 
> This list is for discussion of proposals for doing better than
> bearer tokens (e.g. HTTP cookies, OAuth tokens etc.) for web
> applications. The specific goal is chartering a WG focused on
> preventing security token export and replay attacks.