Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: CACAO

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Thu, 13 September 2018 04:31 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 8FA04130DCC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:31:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 GU9DZVH3xFvi for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (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 9EC03130E17 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id x26-v6so3597085lfi.7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=wIjQGbjoN+tA1E5NHHNf39XCtyp/d2kxubScyu3fL+k=; b=Z/xP7Vxbwr/Bh9S55dq4Xuy5QKfTyw6LV7uRvGNanQUWciFeT0QVuWAKxwlrxHwnGp h8aYrB74QScrjGwbW/M5SWjP5J2e30oKSI5ZRkfVxU5f3JBXUbKP6J5WTOKmPuSFCw7u 4SJPn5lzqUoGOcUhwMkRntlU56wBP4FFRx7nuWcGgdHN5GutqDLhdCkRmCae7AR1xBEP JwKmEK7vqrHw+k8fMf/Zq++RIlNc3Tt1xzsBxk9rUSKJOdziTQq5+WhLtCdLbs8d9IzK hGscaaAVgiTYQ++z/1APF9JIUHA7N6wWVqvsdGZvWCj/KdrgPWApXgdBYh5biix6qQ4O j93A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wIjQGbjoN+tA1E5NHHNf39XCtyp/d2kxubScyu3fL+k=; b=jihW6MwKu8gwyhLz07zYJVHKHOljfT51DCRxXM1sIsOqa/ldSm+jZ8oQlxOhJvs4q5 PiVAclMfom966Y6ID0jGwqlIZU33QY6UaWR20hSgFRtRPTx92D/HCzebCamzOz9fDpTm LD2jIC7DuWbLdJkRaYbIp7oUbESeKKJ7wAqkyTqjJsdC8I9uGBr5t493MZqH3X7eRF9G Uasy0gCDQrgWpCC6nc352KgiljGQCwcC8TcxC9EHKsVsrKk2DTn5lZ0LjD0KUYGXZCwE o06YkMr7W+6R2VYevAOPVo5Zq3L/+3v0BX2e1z40pQYztEAKsgkdNJwGiy56UQ8vBlCD zhkQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51AFmLPD0xTIIYwTkJxQKctvQABVes1D0fhogTPzX2O4L1XscG4b hNADVDoybPNHxLLjPHiyIMyrf9VNK6OgRIpC4ZPy6w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0Vdady5vyXFx7SHcREPW5JubDMuQRcwES0lhBMZMD7Mbe/twx0KdbcDKPCr4zwHzbw8A8FAPJRWhBq6LA8PqkGeY=
X-Received: by 2002:a19:a915:: with SMTP id s21-v6mr3523883lfe.92.1536813071785; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:ab3:498d:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:30:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <60607ea9-1aba-6512-4a52-b7c8e09c91ba@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <153678592168.9395.10391346115284210918.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAC4RtVCe_Kp7oBg6NewiOvBqRZ9=QKeYZydErxmmUrsjyW4Mnw@mail.gmail.com> <60607ea9-1aba-6512-4a52-b7c8e09c91ba@cs.tcd.ie>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 21:30:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPb45EOsOi9bZPyTMryoktxZt5_ziB8jKXUsRyGPnXQ-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: New Non-WG Mailing List: CACAO
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003af4a80575b92dbf"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/K7BmvSLT0akZITzix_TdRi_Kbfg>
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: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 04:31:19 -0000

Full disclosure: I approved this list, so feel free to be unhappy at me.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>;
wrote:

>
> Hiya,
>
> On 13/09/18 03:37, Barry Leiba wrote:
> > This really should have come with a fuller description: I shouldn't
> > have to contact the list admins just to find out whether a new mailing
> > list ought to be on my radar or not.
>
> Yeah. And the archive's empty. And it uses the almost
> always meaningless prefix "cyber" over and over in
> many predictable (but meaningless) ways.
>

Well, the archive is empty because it was created today, so I don't think
that's much of a critique.

I'll take responsibility for not insisting on there being a very detailed
description. I generally find the descriptions pretty uninformative (see,
for instance https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cicm) so my bar isn't
very high here, but I see how others might feel differently.



So that's all bad signs IMO then (except for the
> existence of the draft.)
>
> I'm also a bit sad that we've gotten to the point
> where we're setting up lists driven to any extent
> by what's really an ill-defined marketing buzzword.
>

> OTOH, the goal according to [1] is an information
> model, so it could be mostly to totally harmless I
> guess;-)
>
> Only other thing to note is that this happens so
> often (new list for who knows what) that maybe the
> tooling's a bit wrong and encourages folks to ok
> or ask for lists without considering that others
> don't have the same (or any) context.
>

I think you and I are just going to have to disagree here. Lists are cheap
-- they're not WGs -- and I bias in favor of facilitating discussion. I
think this is appropriate especially in view of the fact that one of the
first questions we ask for a proposed BOF is whether there has been a lot
of list traffic. Again, you're free to feel differently.

-Ekr



> Cheers,
> S.
>
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jordan-cacao-introduction-00
>
>
> >
> > Barry
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 4:58 PM, IETF Secretariat
> > <ietf-secretariat@ietf.org>; wrote:
> >> A new IETF non-working group email list has been created.
> >>
> >> List address: cacao@ietf.org
> >> Archive: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cacao/
> >> To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cacao
> >>
> >> Purpose:
> >> This email list will be used to discuss Collaborative Automated Course
> of
> >> Action Operations (CACAO) for Cyber Security
> >>
> >> For additional information, please contact the list administrators.
> >>
> >
> >
>