Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announcement list
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 29 September 2021 15:34 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964CB3A0DC1; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 08:34:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 YJK0HAaV7Ayb; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 08:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 676743A0DA8; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 08:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1mVbap-0003aM-Mm; Wed, 29 Sep 2021 11:33:59 -0400
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 11:33:55 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
cc: Working Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announcement list
Message-ID: <99603C7256F62EB788D8F44A@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <2152b7c0-9538-76cd-e0a7-0efe81c3cce1@nostrum.com>
References: <f22d22ea-80da-e595-d91f-c577461766a3@huitema.net> <44B61547-1B28-4D1C-88C1-4AD7BA7F9639@lear.ch> <69E7C755-D09C-447B-B327-4F13C19A3EED@eggert.org> <475d7515-f71a-c3f0-e455-03336226cc47@lear.ch> <04F3603A-514B-49DF-81C5-36023CBBB69E@eggert.org> <CALaySJLseu4Ci_=-OZDN1NKLimnfLSjnPFyv2bwOnOxL6q4RGg@mail.gmail.com> <29d2a637-f629-b494-1cb5-75510e6149dc@isode.com> <2152b7c0-9538-76cd-e0a7-0efe81c3cce1@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/Za9qa02hoD4TdwLQ6D_RvCNlXMg>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 15:34:13 -0000
--On Wednesday, September 29, 2021 09:52 -0500 Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote: >... > Similarly, the "string of interims announcements" that was > brought up is the way it is now because people _asked_ for one > message per session that they could easily search for and > easily visually scan for these (with the date) by subject. It > started as one message. I'm happy to change this to > whatever/wherever, but recognize that what's happening now was > shaped by community feedback. Robert, I think this is a perfect example of where more careful thinking about the problem is important and where "more lists" are perhaps just a distraction. Probably this categorization is not quite right two, but, for the interim announcements for a given WG, I suggest that there are the following kinds of IETF participants: (1) Participants in the WG and (hence) subscribers to its mailing list. (2) People in the same area (small-"a") of work [1] who want to track the WG but rarely, if ever, participate in any active way. (3) People in other areas who might be curious about what is going on. (4) People who don't care whether that WG is meeting or not and might prefer to not be told about it. Now, for (1), separate, per-meeting, announcements might be just right and, if people want them that way, they should continue to go the per-WG mailing lists. For (2) and (3) one announcement for multiple interim meetings is likely just fine and that announcement would be much more useful (and probably read more often) if the announcement contained tentative agendas. And, for (4), the announcements are just noise, noise which those people might prefer to have sent only to the unimportant-news list to which almost no one would subscribe. And, while I can't recommend either (partially because of the tooling and complexity involved), the combination of groups (1) and (2) are a case for either separate "announce" and "discussion" lists for each WG or for being able to subscribe to particular announcement postings based on metadata like topic keywords, Area, and so on rather than treating these issues as ones that can be solved by the rather blunt instrument of fragmenting lists. best, john [1] This will often conform to our Areas, but not always, and that is another issue.
- Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announcement l… IETF Chair
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Melchior Aelmans
- IETF calendar (was: Re: Proposal: an "important-n… Toerless Eckert
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Bob Hinden
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Christian Huitema
- RE: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Adrian Farrel
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Eliot Lear
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Salz, Rich
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… David Noveck
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Tim Wicinski
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Lucas Pardue
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… John C Klensin
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… tom petch
- Re: [irsg] Proposal: an "important-news" IETF ann… Lars Eggert
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Lars Eggert
- Re: [irsg] Proposal: an "important-news" IETF ann… Lars Eggert
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Lars Eggert
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Eliot Lear
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Lars Eggert
- RE: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… MORTON JR., AL
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Stephen Farrell
- RE: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… STARK, BARBARA H
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Eliot Lear
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Carsten Bormann
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Barry Leiba
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Alexey Melnikov
- RE: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… MORTON JR., AL
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Robert Sparks
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Michael Richardson
- RE: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… STARK, BARBARA H
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… John C Klensin
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Barry Leiba
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Barry Leiba
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… John C Klensin
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… tom petch
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… tom petch
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Michael Richardson
- making upcoming calendar more useful Michael Richardson
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Jay Daley
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Barry Leiba
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Jay Daley
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Martin Thomson
- Why last calls matter more than ever [Re: Proposa… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: making upcoming calendar more useful John C Klensin
- Re: making upcoming calendar more useful Warren Kumari
- Re: making upcoming calendar more useful Barry Leiba
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… tom petch
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Michael Richardson
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… tom petch
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… John C Klensin
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Michael Richardson
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Robert Sparks
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… Michael Richardson
- Re: Proposal: an "important-news" IETF announceme… John C Klensin
- The links page [was: something else] Brian E Carpenter