Hi, Jay,
Greetings to another IETF mailing list explorer. May you live long and prosper. :-)
Inline ...
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 1:54 AM Jay Daley <jay@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
John
> On 26/02/2020, at 8:19 PM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
.....
> Those are really not arguments to avoid splitting the lists.
> Instead, they suggest that, if you are going to do such a thing,
> that you be aware of possible unintended side-effects and figure
> out a way to mitigate them or even improve things because of
> them. Would we benefit from a monthly summary report from you,
> one that summarizes or details outstanding RFPs, not just
> plenary reports? Do we need more explanatory material about why
> those who subscribe to the IETF-announce list might want to
> subscribe to the other lists too? Should subscribing to
> IETF-Announce automatically put one on the other lists on an
> opt-out basis rather than requiring people to find them one at a
> time and subscribe (that would protect people who only want to
> see the RFP list from being bothered by the irrelevant-to-them
> traffic on the IETF-Announce but would keep the information for
> subscribers to the latter constant)? As we continue to break
> things out (I definitely see a trend) should we think of
> IETF-Announce as a list of lists to which people can subscribe
> (or opt out) selectively if they so choose but whose default is
> "all announcements"?
Yes, this is the important issue to consider and a useful set of questions to help frame that.
It’s also a wider problem than announcements/reports - I only realised last week that there was an active mtgvenue list, one of many “admin” lists, and also a tools-discuss list, one of many “devops(?)” lists.
I pointed out when the discussion about COVID-19 popped up on THIS very mailing list, that the IESG had created a design team to think about a massively-remote IETF meeting that became massively remote on short notice, soon after a similar set of posts on this mailing list when we had the IETF 95 Buenos Aires meeting in 2016, amidst concerns about the Zika virus (remember the Zika virus?). I believe Stephen Farrell suggested the name, https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manycouches, with this description: "Manycouches -- List is a design team list to identify issues that would arise should an IETF meeting ever be held with O(1000) 'remote' participants."
That discussion (with smart people) rain until IETF 98, and I'd thought it had converged, so wasn't subscribed when Wes and Ted restarted discussion about a year ago, and that's been pretty active, including discussions about COVID-19, ever since, but I didn't know it, and many of the points being made on that mailing list were also being made here.
So, my point is that there are mailing lists that are having discussions of interest to the community, that it's not easy to for the community to find out about. And now, I might have told you about one more!
It happens that I'm subscribing to mailing lists at a couple of other SDOs. One has a "here's a list of all the mailing lists you can subscribe to" page, and the other one ... doesn't.
> And so on. I don't know the answers to any of those questions,
> but would hope that you (and we) would think about them.
Will do. I suspect the way forward requires a dose of creativity.
And communication! Darn it ...
Do the right thing, of course.
Spencer
Jay
--
Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director
+64 21 678840
>
> best,
> john
>
