Re: [Tools-discuss] rfc-editor.org mailing lists don't add "Archived-At"?

Glen <glen@amsl.com> Wed, 21 July 2021 20:25 UTC

Return-Path: <glen@amsl.com>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA0D43A2800 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:25:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 aEEyE3k3NGol for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 633853A2805 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2321E389F8D; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Z301 (unknown [IPv6:2603:3024:1507:36a0:e17f:7cd8:b9e4:164c]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D359389EC3; Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Glen" <glen@amsl.com>
To: <tools-discuss@ietf.org>
References: <000d01d77da9$a7b745b0$f725d110$@amsl.com> <30861.1626897244@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <30861.1626897244@localhost>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:25:04 -0700
Message-ID: <001101d77e6e$7dab7550$79025ff0$@amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Content-Language: en-us
Thread-Index: AQNmwm3u9zAJqJBJ5Rd1OzKiiJhI6AH5q+vBqB+G4EA=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/eXeVSE0sfDuPLUR2xslCMm5pz7I>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfc-editor.org mailing lists don't add "Archived-At"?
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 20:25:11 -0000

Having been summoned by name :-) ...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
> To: Glen <glen@amsl.com>om>; tools-discuss@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfc-editor.org mailing lists don't add "Archived-
> At"?

> (I've been told that Glen is moving towards containers for everything)

I'm gratified that you think I'm a "mover" :-) - I try to be as proactive on things as I can.  But, just so nobody gets the wrong idea....

I am *supporting* moving towards containers for as many things as make sense so to do.   I've had long discussions with the IETF (Jay and Robert, mainly - pity them!) to hammer out best practices and clarify my own understanding of the challenges involved.  Like most of us, I love new technologies (and, let's be honest!, new *toys*), and containerization has some exciting aspects that I really like.  I am working hard - in my "copious" free time - to better learn and understand the operational nuances of Docker, Podman, K8S, and related technologies, and hope to build out some really great future infrastructure using these technologies, so that my team and I can better support these things for the IETF, as they move their tools and services into the future.

But I do not "move" the IETF, I just *serve* the IETF.  :-)

Glen