Re: Stray thoughts on ' Update of IESG statement "Last Call Guidance to the Community"'

Lars Eggert <> Thu, 22 April 2021 16:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC1463A17C8 for <>; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:24:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OeSMxA7Z1v3e for <>; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:24:24 -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 D747A3A17C2 for <>; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:24:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:859c:1ce7:aab5:26d6] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:859c:1ce7:aab5:26d6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B53AB60033C; Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:24:12 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=dkim; t=1619108652; bh=IhbRq0NPckxRsxrVyr73a8gzpiA+Drdwaw8EWfBYSdo=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=wnaacSINRWn6RRd1lfKQp5aKTuMJ4MYmsgir3c3EvO9M+zu8wkTdbULM+mgQfZdMe 7AwO2Sks3ZLzblQqVsnzfIKUHB/W010bD5cPidsmdJ4smsaLcbqdqlSIBSw0gm5WWD puqddvl5oCXoJqpDy1MH7tn2gh/J3dmfyqJC+wEk=
From: Lars Eggert <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B2FF0031-BCA5-4F21-B3AD-E896B8F797EE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.\))
Subject: Re: Stray thoughts on ' Update of IESG statement "Last Call Guidance to the Community"'
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 19:24:12 +0300
In-Reply-To: <>
To: tom petch <>
References: <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.
X-MailScanner-ID: B53AB60033C.A0877
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
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, 22 Apr 2021 16:24:29 -0000

Hi Tom,

On 2021-4-22, at 19:16, tom petch <> wrote:
> I am left wondering why, and why now.  There was a discussion about the usefulness of the last call list recently but that does not seem relevant.  As ever, this comes from the IESG so will have one or more humans behind it, as opposed to being created by AI, but I do wonder who and why.

that discussion was what prompted the update, since it was one of the actions that was described as a consequence of the successful conclusion of the last-call experiment, which the IESG declared in April 2020.

Please see and related messages in the thread for context, esp. the links to the original email describing the experiment.