Perhaps there should be an auth48 mailing list per working group? It would be used for all auth48 interactions associated with the docs for that WG. When a doc from a WG enters auth48, a note would be sent to the WG indicating the location of that working group mailing list. Non-WG auth48 interactions could use a single non-WG mailing list.
I think this would satisfy both Ted's and Ekr's preferences. (Mine too. :) )
Advantages:
*) Separates the auth48 traffic away from the working group.
*) Separates the auth48 traffic for one WG from all other auth48 traffic.
*) Reduces the number of mailing lists that need to be managed.
*) The mailing list could be moderated to only allow the auth48 authors (and RPC) to post to it, and only while their documents are in that state.
*) Allows someone who wants to follow the auth48 traffic for that WG to do so.
*) Doesn't force someone (who is interested in following the auth48 traffic for a given set of WGs) from seeing the back and forth for ALL WGs.
I think the last two bullets are particularly important.
Tony
On 2/25/2022, 10:15 AM, "rfc-interest on behalf of Ted Hardie" <rfc-interest-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of ted.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 2:19 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> While I think transparency is good, I think sending them through the WG list would be a mistake.
>
> In many cases there is a tremendous amount of back and forth about small details that I would prefer not to be bothered with for every WG list I am on.
>
> I don't object to a separate list that WG members could subscribe to.
>
> -Ekr
>
This would work for me, and I think it is a nice parallel to the way
the GH comment streams are set up in the working groups that use them.
There is a separate list you can subscribe to, and it's your choice as
to whether to intermingle that in your folders with the main WG list.
I personally keep them nested under the main list, and I'd do the same
here, but I like the flexibility this proposal offers.
