[Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough draft of message to the community re Zulip and Matrix)
Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Fri, 25 September 2020 18:18 UTC
Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: tools-implementation@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-implementation@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 588BF3A1408; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:18:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.079
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.079 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, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.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 tbvhglBd6TYr; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:18:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 DC5AC3A1404; Fri, 25 Sep 2020 11:18:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unescapeable.local ([47.186.30.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 08PIImXc006036 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 25 Sep 2020 13:18:54 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1601057936; bh=uVcNO1KLBAIiUP/aWgiGkf1BXJi/oGXcxgu6eBcmq10=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=QaPqdu/PHjdiAkT8QK6jZ/JdMYc2PkrxWl8UT2Uqjk09GEPgiZOEKqgUdFIOWxvXf bzpI0zZ+dds0tsfttELQTmFYeeG/1R9wazlOkP6RfP3JQ81CyyyuEpyUFmAy0mS6iT TuHPUrU9En6pJWK4QKw/4QjtVduF+UXhGllx+H28=
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.30.41] claimed to be unescapeable.local
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Cc: "tools-implementation@ietf.org" <tools-implementation@ietf.org>
References: <e7a6fdf3-09dd-1328-60cc-6dd32dda7601@nostrum.com> <8EC6DB09-5959-42CE-A218-98BCA2E103D5@vigilsec.com> <6B880295-8288-433B-A6B5-17C03076C7ED@ietf.org>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <dc59100d-a556-bc82-dff3-fa8bd6ee09c8@nostrum.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 13:18:47 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6B880295-8288-433B-A6B5-17C03076C7ED@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-implementation/sLOn9B2pvue6henn-zWUaWgRgJs>
Subject: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough draft of message to the community re Zulip and Matrix)
X-BeenThere: tools-implementation@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Tools Implementation <tools-implementation.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-implementation>, <mailto:tools-implementation-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-implementation/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-implementation@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-implementation-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-implementation>, <mailto:tools-implementation-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2020 18:18:58 -0000
I think this reflects the comments so far, with the exception of not talking about the potential delay for the zulip email message. Lets wait for Glen to have an opportunity to look/tweak before we talk about that. ----- We are deploying trials of the matrix and zulip chat services to gain operational experience and get community feedback about how well these services meet the need for IETF related chat. We have clear evidence from the IETF 107 post-meeting survey (https://www.ietf.org/media/documents/ietf-107-survey-results.pdf) that many IETF participants find jabber a significant problem. This is partly due to difficulties in finding a free jabber service and partly due to client issues. There are two paths to try to resolve these problems, one is to improve the IETF jabber service and the other is to switch to an alternative groupchat solution. The community has already taken a step on the latter path with the introduction of an IETF Slack space, and we want to ensure that this path is properly explored by widening the range of options to well established free/open source tools. The installs currently have almost no local configuration or customization. Over the next few weeks, we will be exploring reconfiguring them to use datatracker credentials for sign-in, and explore bridging between these systems, Slack, and Jabber. One consequence of these explorations is that there will likely be times, outside of meetings, when accounts will be disrupted or even removed and will have to be recreated. Initially, we suggest you use an email address for the username on each service. The secretariat is operating each instance. We've chosen this path for these trials over third party hosting to learn what would be needed if the community felt self-hosting was important in the longer term. The services can be found at matrix-trial1.ietf.org and zulip-trial1.ietf.org. Any matrix client can be used with the trial matrix server. There is also a web client available at at matrix-trial1.ietf.org. Similarly any zulip client can be used with the trial zulip server, which has a built in web interface. We would like feedback on how well each client meets chat needs during meetings, both the full online IETF 109 meeting, virtuals, adhocs, and hallway conversations. Around December, we will assess our experiences and the feedback received to inform what chat services we provide in the future and how we will operate them. In January, these trial instances will be taken down. We do not intend to preserve or migrate any account configuration or chat history from the trial instances as we move forward. This does add to the potentially confusing large number of places conversation might take place. We hope to address that with some level of bridging, at least with Jabber, but have been cautioned by the respective development communities that bridging between Zulip and Matrix is unsatisfying since the conversation models in the two applications are so different. The chat services are intended to be explorational and informal. However, please treat them as contexts where contribution rules apply (See https://www.ietf.org/about/note-well/). We are not, at this time, planning to host jabber accounts. We may revisit that as an option as we continue to gather more feedback. Please send feedback on the services to tools-discuss@ietf.org
- [Tools-implementation] Rough draft of message to … Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Rough draft of message… Russ Housley
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Rough draft of message… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Rough draft of message… Russ Housley
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Rough draft of message… Russ Housley
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Rough draft of message… Jay Daley
- [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough draft o… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Glen
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Glen
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Glen
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Glen
- Re: [Tools-implementation] Draft 2 (was Rough dra… Glen