[dnsext] The list name (was: 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035)
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Wed, 07 December 2011 14:53 UTC
Return-Path: <dnsext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-namedroppers-archive-gleetwall6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com
(Postfix) with ESMTP id 3813121F84A9; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:53:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1;
t=1323269602; bh=EJ3A6tSGYNhg8b7CNoljkrlrunv2mz/XZbsCJyNpgAc=;
h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To: Subject:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:
List-Subscribe:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Sender;
b=Iuo9wrJwyb1F25tNlD3YHDsJtZc88FLfmbYHlRuF3ZMjnAIuPPZ12J+MNSUtuYCo+
wzuWKZtBS+rxAZCsKdg5jn5KEEgjouYL1TrYcSuV0ZcUEt/zhV2uMhkPAsDvcW9HsK
Pt5lD81w91wy0z50s6qNO/6Kv2Bnjbp8IhAOaBxs=
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id A8EB821F84A8 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:53:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.495
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.104,
BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NoTSaG-TqXt8 for
<dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:53:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.yitter.info (mail.yitter.info [208.86.224.201]) by
ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31B3F21F84A7 for <dnsext@ietf.org>;
Wed, 7 Dec 2011 06:53:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shinkuro.com (69-196-144-227.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.144.227])
(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client
certificate requested) by mail.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id
5B0BC1ECB420 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Dec 2011 14:53:02 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 09:53:16 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: dnsext@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20111207145316.GD1108@shinkuro.com>
References: <20111206221911.06FDA1925ECD@drugs.dv.isc.org>
<a06240800cb051d0f9a98@[10.31.200.139]>
<3C110754-F1CC-4AD1-A4D1-24889EA2C9EE@insensate.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3C110754-F1CC-4AD1-A4D1-24889EA2C9EE@insensate.co.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Subject: [dnsext] The list name (was: 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035)
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>,
<mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>,
<mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsext-bounces@ietf.org
Dear colleagues, On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 01:55:18PM +0000, Lawrence Conroy wrote: > > This question is why I'm happy that the Namedroppers list is continuing. With my list-moderator hat on, I want to note that this list is not the namedroppers list. The namedroppers list was a list that was operated on ops.ietf.org, which had (and according to a query I just issued, still has) as its MX a machine in psg.com. Some of you may remember that we attempted to move that list onto the ietf.org infrastructure, and were not able to do so. This was partly because one of the people behind the operation of the list in its old home were opposed to such a move and were unwilling to co-operate in it. Both of your moderators lost access to administrative operations on that list during that period. Accordingly, the list supporting DNSEXT was changed. I do not know the status of the (old) namedroppers list, although I note that the former archives seem not to work and that the last time I tried to send mail to the former address the mail apparently disappeared. I just want to ensure, for the record, that this is clear, since the current controllers of namedroppers seemed to feel quite strongly that the control of that list should remain with them. The DNSEXT list moderators have no idea whether the namedroppers list is continuing. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com _______________________________________________ dnsext mailing list dnsext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext
- [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 Mark Andrews
- Re: [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 Edward Lewis
- Re: [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 Lawrence Conroy
- [dnsext] The list name (was: 3007 vs 4033, 4034 a… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: [dnsext] 3007 vs 4033, 4034 and 4035 SM