James Galvin wrote: Hi, thanks for the explanation, I add some notes of what I think this means, please correct me if I got it wrong. [2418] >| As a service to the community, the IETF Secretariat >| operates a mailing list archive for working group >| mailing lists. Most lists I submitted to the "other lists" are in fact former WG lists. I guess there is nothing to do for the submitter / AD / list owner for former IETF WG lists, the "official" archives are likely still subscribed. > Today, all lists are created in "ietf.org", unless they > are IAB, IESG, or IRTF lists. Okay. Existing "other lists" are not necessarily hosted by ietf.org, they can be anywhere (Harald, IMC, Pobox, W3C, Google, Yahoo!, etc.) > Last year the IETF did an audit, for the first time in > forever, and brought everything up-to-date. This means > that at that time all the "other lists" had an archive > on the IETF web site. Great, that should take care of any list I ever submitted with one or two fresher exceptions. > However, we're out of date again. Maybe the two archive subscriptions could be added to the verification procedure. As far as I can tell it the Web form creates a request to the chosen AD, the AD can then accept, reject, or ignore it. The accept state could be split to arrange the archive subscriptions. Lots of fun there, but there aren't many "other list", and most have a mailman Web interface. > These archives have a SPAM problem. Willing to explain the secrets of RFC 4408, but maybe not again here... :-) > My opinion is that the IETF should just create a mailing > list for every WG and then these "other lists" should > just subscribe the IETF list to their list. The opposition can then still pretend to send mail from the old list to the new list, and vice versa. The position of the gateway on the IETF side (directly above the archives vs. before the new list) won't necessarily change the spam problem. If something breaks you have a split, articles appearing only in the old or new list. A gateway directly above the archives has the same problem, but archives at least don't try to post... :-) Or if they apparently post it must be spam. > Mailman provides some useful built-in features. Unfortunately it doesn't let me say "for each subscribed nobody@xyzzy add a new address jhjhjggjhmgc@gmail", it also doesn't let me say "now please consider hmhmdnbdngnf@gmail to have write access on all existing lists". > Part of the maintenance problem is that for obscure > reasons the ETF subscriber on these "other lists" will > drop off the list occasionally. I'd be interested in > hearing any good ideas for how to deal with this issue. Pass. Disable password reminder, maybe ? > The Secretariat has to take action to make these email > addresses work. I realize this is probably obvious to > everyone here, but in the interests of completeness it > should be documented that if you're going to setup an > "other list" you need to ask to have the archives > created. Certainly not obvious for me, I never did this. I just filled out the submission form, staying away from using "<" + ">", because that breaks the "other lists" script. ADs are annoyed when they have to confirm updates only because "<" + ">" breaks the "other lists" Web page ;-) Frank _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf