Blind reply-alls (Was: Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/30/13 7:45 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
So my personal opinion is that this is a valid discussion to be having
even if we're having it again in IETF LC.

Folks,

This document is *not* in IETF LC. A particular WG member, who was apparently upset with the tone of the argument on the SPFBIS and DNSEXT list, expressed his upset by cross-posting to the IETF list, claiming this had something to do with the "IETF Diversity" topic.

Then a bunch of other SPFBIS and DNSEXT folks blindly used "Reply-All", resulting in us all seeing this discussion.

I will leave it to the chairs/sergeants-of-arms of the respective lists to decide how they want to deal with this, but personally I think this discussion is not useful to have on the IETF list at the moment and suggest that folks be more careful of their use of "Reply-All". I also suggest that cross-posting to a new list without noting that in the body of the message is bad netiquette.

pr

--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]