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

Barry Leiba <> Thu, 12 September 2019 17:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E045120154 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.922
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 ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dhbKb1cxUJ9E for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65380120128 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id i1so24710900edv.4 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; 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: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Barry Leiba <>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:26:55 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Planned experiment: A new mailing list for last-call discussions
To: Ross Finlayson <>
Cc: IETF discussion list <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-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 <> at that time.
> Wouldn’t it be better to have “” 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
<>rg>; they already do not get posted to <>rg>.
What would change is that the reply-to would become

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.