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

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Thu, 12 September 2019 17:27 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba.mailing.lists@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 1E045120154 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.922
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.922 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.026, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 dhbKb1cxUJ9E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-f49.google.com (mail-ed1-f49.google.com [209.85.208.49]) (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 65380120128 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-f49.google.com with SMTP id i1so24710900edv.4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MIoAGu3h9PUA7yhFYvkopQ5NL+v12fXEZ6mk0rGypog=; b=BgLAJVF1anPO0bO9uCrUKkmLKfo9iiHidwRw5R+UkaBn4YNun47Up3PSwWiEGMkrVf kJWF+dMC2+dDTO8Bi2HMAq9rILUxcGRl5NKppe6MrPBbr6SrLl/tfoJAz+dP1u/WlbYa TTU7O/UzLtM9eQpdLDs1DUL1g5BPUMlGsknWPDOK+fVeBEu9laTlBJaQuorGT5pny0iW nmzfte13Qz9zWRzsCsr3ltneR3Zckye3j9pKZJpPFaRd2EQc07JQFLNv2s+RADYjkcJu o0X8gKY6n9+97awZAcqITGqBPpsOp8/DsDDFku3+zDVNrW5BfEzrrAf+V/u8w35d+lfQ 3knw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUue1O9Z4X7iY0hTySt2xC77xCkiaHpYGAFEPClWh7jxsuYjEp5 VjxuST+lWFfEQkE65JCKFTQFY4yt4OzsxGsl32UgwQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyYSi8GdtE4mFLr/aN7K9DHTZavmijDwzRzBD4fYKq0kRy/yRL6LcDLnOs33E7ScR4paShYR9XsVw5n0G/9wII=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:5246:: with SMTP id y6mr8049925ejm.158.1568309226718; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CALaySJKvdoy9MtzHMwq-Ew-EJoUs0V8t+y01FL-E5r3xdyRemQ@mail.gmail.com> <71A0E428-79DA-4AF9-8163-CBB430BEF36F@live555.com>
In-Reply-To: <71A0E428-79DA-4AF9-8163-CBB430BEF36F@live555.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:26:55 -0400
Message-ID: <CAC4RtVCLurTyCpZ=oakcGqO5XG=B0bZQOsUxRAoDf2YzXsSJ6g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Planned experiment: A new mailing list for last-call discussions
To: Ross Finlayson <finlayson@live555.com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ZXlv-Z3mRUEfi137CdQXs9xsweE>
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, 12 Sep 2019 17:27:10 -0000

Hi, Ross.

> > Our plan is to create the new list and pre-subscribe everyone who is
> > subscribed to <ietf@ietf.org>; at that time.
>
> Wouldn’t it be better to have “ietf@ietf.org” itself (and not its current subscribers) on
> the new mailing list (so that anyone who subscribes to “ietf” later will automatically
> get last-call announcements as well)?

First, remember that (as noted in the message) the last-call
*announcements* go to ietf-announce, with reply-to set to
<ietf@ietf.org>;; they already do not get posted to <ietf@ietf.org>;.
What would change is that the reply-to would become
<last-call@ietf.org>;.

Second, one of the points of this is to allow people to choose to
follow the last-call discussions and/or the IETF general discussion,
and to make separate choices for those -- some will want one, some the
other, some both.  If we were to subscribe one list to the other, it
wouldn't be possible to choose which to subscribe to independently.

Barry