IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Changes needed to Last Call boilerplate

David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com> Fri, 13 February 2009 02:42 UTC

Return-Path: <dwm@xpasc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D4E63A6D61 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.276
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.276 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.323, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1NNT4+U0SFa7 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from email.xpasc.com (email.xpasc.com [65.85.17.142]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7EF03A6986 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bslepgate.xpasc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bslepgate.xpasc.com (Postfix-out) with ESMTP id 36128100584; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Propel-Return-Path: <dwm@xpasc.com>
Received: from email.xpasc.com ([10.1.2.88]) by [127.0.0.1] ([127.0.0.1]) (port 7027) (Abaca EPG outproxy filter 3.1.1.9347 $Rev: 9262 $) id iz6Ur92d2GB0; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:37 -0800
Received: from xpasc.com (egate.xpasc.com [10.1.2.49]) by bslepgate.xpasc.com (Postfix-out) with ESMTP id 163AF10008D; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from egate.xpasc.com (egate.xpasc.com [10.1.2.49]) by xpasc.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1D2ga1E009997; Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:36 -0800
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:36 -0800
From: David Morris <dwm@xpasc.com>
To: Willie Gillespie <wgillespie+ietf@es2eng.com>
Subject: Re: Changes needed to Last Call boilerplate
In-Reply-To: <4994DC20.2070107@es2eng.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0902121838440.25480@egate.xpasc.com>
References: <20090213001531.2CFE46BE551@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <4994D366.5010206@gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0902121802050.25480@egate.xpasc.com> <4994DC20.2070107@es2eng.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
X-Propel-ID: iz6Ur92d2GB0
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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, 13 Feb 2009 02:42:32 -0000

On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Willie Gillespie wrote:

> David Morris wrote:
>> Seems like a unique mailbox per lastcall would be very helpful all around.
>> Right now, gathering and evaluating comments must be a nightmare. An 
>> David Morris
...
> Not a bad idea.  In fact, it may be useful to have a unique "list" per draft, 
> so every comment relating to a particular draft can be tracked historically. 
> This example is how I understand your suggestion:
>
> ietf+housley-tls-authz-extns@ietf.org will automatically be set up with the 
> initial ID submission.  E-mails sent to it will be regarded as discussion 
> pertaining to the draft.

Pretty much, I didn't quite say that because an alternative like:
    lc_098@ietf.org
where:
    lc_098 ==> ietf+housley-tls-authz-extns
would be an alternative with slightly easier usage and presentation in
email clients. A simple web index to map and perhaps a mailto: link.

Either way meets my basic use case.

David

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email