Re: Proposed ietf.org email address policy

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 12 June 2021 20:49 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@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 AFBFE3A20C8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jun 2021 13:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 AG1d1-EFwN9r for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Jun 2021 13:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52c.google.com (mail-pg1-x52c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52c]) (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 1F9083A20C4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Jun 2021 13:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id o9so5405289pgd.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Jun 2021 13:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gioYFvJMSqRZcWej70ajF1tYnuhcV6B7yhkUWMnq3Y0=; b=a6ijBSunc/O1i38V/chn15DwV00Ha3xiibRL0LCtHVPJrTdaRoOPy/A4x8lvlEDRRA ea/H1On+uc3g5U620hsY0rnvPcQZpPApODaGV3khnBcbGA/AzE0RcANMHm382SoQ/TZH 4FrmbBDYPE8ieKQsnFqguYXeukSxlGmIhfsysBR5Sx/PJgcRVlZ8ZOa9N2mcN/22ti7W 8bQ7RCi/YKZFBOyA7fZXW5ju9fXa16hkDQm/QbpDZMpBUnHCTrN+2NZJ/o4zyBfcufSV vnuXMc+pFnZwg22IJfxibUy26EYtmE8Dzcg8Np4+WGJCYkGU9Xp4JhoELkcJCci5dkFO bIIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=gioYFvJMSqRZcWej70ajF1tYnuhcV6B7yhkUWMnq3Y0=; b=p8mrE6v5y25bbJY1lm5Q7BTMdnjNV+goMThqfN2ArQ4pndFWD3q0Y9AuuhK4mS8/iX uylNMD2pTvhxtlXF3GorFEPBYQJrDgOrIrBAsxSXKmWt7oCGpVdswkl41tbOu5Ph9zXj SmMBi/Lblql/B0oSKmlsNFerwkkkgdEP0SCpmLOWX5o0gx5s5h/CX2fsrnFUDSU9Wwy8 C3GIwxCTZ6ahp7VVunFxjupGMjq2Bqw1RL2R6LdAjsOWsxQIe55gq2jlbvYi7JS49QD0 ZpQTb1nU/kq3I1l0xpJJHUm76OZghpaNzaJZuj337yLoC/ENppZgKeaJPmSMJi8de2hn R8Sw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531gICVs0omxJssL8HdzYNXeX6broJBlyN6W4mh+81sJgr4yfbtk wifaf3RxZCXqwC6urwLrd9UF2yuknMglXw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyeAKSfYUJU7D8Rb2pXJqzn6z2dY3bmFJxtSye8+10RFGUghsg/diwJ8CBgniQlCeNVrgKoiQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:22cc:b029:2eb:fd24:e1fe with SMTP id f12-20020a056a0022ccb02902ebfd24e1femr14471360pfj.65.1623530957685; Sat, 12 Jun 2021 13:49:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:100d:901:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:100d:901:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s4sm7933897pjn.31.2021.06.12.13.49.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 12 Jun 2021 13:49:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Proposed ietf.org email address policy
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com>
Cc: IETF list <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <2BF6EC60-8B32-4171-B236-D9D038B3135B@yahoo.co.uk> <20210611174521.CD568F22E4A@ary.qy> <20210611182604.GA36947@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <ff6d912d-b0c6-4550-8d16-a79348e45699@dogfood.fastmail.com> <CAKKJt-enK4XmMuapke9LX-3TVuyg9j12zS9RyWXqvOT6Vbk5Mw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <22284ade-50ca-e548-9407-b27d6554e7bb@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2021 08:49:13 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-enK4XmMuapke9LX-3TVuyg9j12zS9RyWXqvOT6Vbk5Mw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/caw6oF6ObYXd7FJxoNJxaimkr-A>
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: Sat, 12 Jun 2021 20:49:25 -0000

On 13-Jun-21 02:48, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
...
> I think the IESG (as a whole or as individual ADs, if you're good at guessing which one) is the last resort now, for people who want to follow up about an RFC and who can figure that out. 

It's rather odd, when you think about it, that all RFC's don't contain boilerplate like:

This is a Request for Comments. If you have any comments, please send them to xxx@yyy.zzz.

   Brian