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

Eric Rescorla <> Thu, 12 September 2019 17:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87E82120154 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id np7I3T-Dmc06 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 087E2120152 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id w6so19988103lfl.2 for <>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BNCcOIrLUbOCVEsy4xAwJzpPhQgTLGQ2us00FIZhQ7k=; b=at9l5GDBwejT75BSSaZSG3bhReWyBvIZJqwqQeXOah9lGGCbH5u0Y2I1LfStXJfAvQ CdkzmiVre5FLuEDLFNIBLrwGhBLh2RMbPlN7siZb3cT24sLK5Jz2CWCnFGrnO6e+fatb YTLYjnM/1U5SelTXC/dSSOEPuyrteOyMYz/yfwZNYbJCDblgAqZV9vE+QIszOR4Ewkhb JH+bCbCelyBiQqTwJlt8/nsuCbE1vFvC3FtA0AXxmAAZ1HS7UmIkmpzR1mIaeCLHI169 nrGSDsIz2HZlm7JY0VEDHMB4JH6iMgB1CnQ7s99JIpM9/vzcuJ+e5wx3/XryS9gK1R+o QM4w==
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; bh=BNCcOIrLUbOCVEsy4xAwJzpPhQgTLGQ2us00FIZhQ7k=; b=K1jDYt8cC4Yntnr1Gh2CU/mrAFTgUrwEcxyv+xhupW7TjamudWt9IvlsKxXZvXWkcY e0yERCXhZbVjx9AIeA8mRw5xfzwNwLpiNsB5xt1nuXshJ8MC5L15eVKlOATz73Xlnunw Zs4at/pkR/HDFXa2aPabrLQjZEYH3EYgTepggznrgr0ohc3TfDRUnVWl7fU2kY0FI37/ K+GaA/0faWO/Px3+8YwPqXSJckp/A3lvN6zArtPvn2lywTKjM1TJc68MFpVSC11FYiFy 0hrpvEmcX7LRuN6+NScP2GRS/PzkcFtY9XzOJQQun7lujcnW96O5knOJKIcrHH1cCqTm KNgg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXLWv28ES58hj5wNkztvT4MZ6l/Xv61RbE6/0KQMHD3vg3A1Ph1 3ZSd3Xhw5fE8BoTBxeMnAvOXqmNOTKJqe8gHVEMS7w==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy/smGP9ZH6HWD2JyMBkkbg9GvJ2eYJLS/aXWK960Q2BGsH1fisKYrYFoqGIhDtZ5l1Rczlot5/F43QJpHtJTg=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5a19:: with SMTP id q25mr5480985lfn.178.1568308026318; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Eric Rescorla <>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:06:30 -0700
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Planned experiment: A new mailing list for last-call discussions
To: Barry Leiba <>
Cc: IETF discussion list <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ceb46305925e2ab1"
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 17:07:10 -0000

+1. This seems like a great idea.


On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 9:14 AM Barry Leiba <> wrote:

> As we discussed in the plenary session at IETF 105 in Montréal, some
> community members have suggested moving document last-call discussions
> onto a dedicated "last-call" mailing list, and off of the general
> <> list.  The latter is a high-volume list with a lot of
> varied discussion, and some think that it would be useful to separate
> the general discussion from the last-call discussion, to allow people
> to choose which discussions (or both) to follow.  In the IETF 105
> plenary, support was expressed for that separation.
> The IESG agrees, and wants to try an experiment to that end.  We
> propose to create <> and to direct last-call
> comments and discussions there (the last-call announcements would
> still go to <>rg>, with "reply-to" set to the new
> list).  That list would be monitored by volunteers recruited by the
> IETF Chair, and digressions would be nudged back to <>rg>,
> while we would ask people having last-call discussions on this list to
> please move them to the new list.  We would get the tools team
> involved so that the distribution lists for directorate and
> review-team reviews would be updated appropriately.
> Our plan is to create the new list and pre-subscribe everyone who is
> subscribed to <> at that time.  Of course, anyone could
> unsubscribe to either or both lists immediately or later, but we think
> that doing it this way would minimize the likelihood that people would
> miss important stuff because of the move, and folks can choose what
> they prefer from there.
> After six months, we would do an initial evaluation, including getting
> feedback from the community, to see how the experiment is working.  If
> it seems worth continuing we would do so, and at a point that the
> community decides that the experiment is a success (should it so
> decide), we would start an update to BCP 45 to formally move the
> location for last-call discussions, and we would update the 2007 IESG
> Statement on Last Call Guidance.
> We invite comments, here, on this plan, by the end of September. As I
> say above, we've heard support from the community for the general
> idea, and we'd like to make sure this direction is what the community
> wants.
> Barry, for the IESG