Melinda,
The current description of the list is very clear and very useful,
and well defines whats in and whats out of scope. It should not
be changed or amended by new rules as proposed by the current IAB.
Whoever sponsors the list, IAB or else, if it is an @ietf.org
mailing list, it should follow what we have come to expect to
be appropriate for IETF. When the IAB wants to have more constrained
mailing lists, which may make perfect sense for other lists, they
can have them under @iab.org. architecture-discuss@xxxxxxxx was
specifically set up there to indicate its an IETF community mailing list
thats also explicitly what the description says. The IETF community
does not operate under IAB rules.
Cheers
Toerless
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:52:00AM -0800, Melinda Shore wrote:
> On 4/20/20 11:49 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
> > Personally, I think it's a handy list to have
> > for purely technical discussions as opposed to all the non-technical
> > discussions on the main IETF discussion list.
>
> Right, but I think it's clear that it's not every technical
> discussion, which circles back around to Toerless's argument.
>
> Melinda
--
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
