On Jul 24, 2014, at 1:20 PM, Pete Resnick
<presnick(_at_)qti(_dot_)qualcomm(_dot_)com> wrote:
I agree with Brian on the important outcome of having everyone be able to
watch the mailstorm, but there are other ways to accomplish the same task:
- We could have a separate lastcalls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org list that only had
last calls. That would eliminate side discussions about IANA transitions and
the importance of cookies.
- We could have each Last Call announced on ietf-announce with a specific
list, say, <draftname>-lastcall(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org, for Last Call comments
on that particular. We could make lastcalls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org a read-only
list that would get a copy of everything to
<draftname>-lastcall(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org. That way, it would be
straightforward to separate the threads for the different Last Calls (and
have the chair or AD who is running the Last Call lead their particular
discussion), but still allow everyone to see the mailstorm if they subscribed
to lastcalls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org.
We've got to decide what we want to accomplish out of this task (as was
mentioned in several ways last night) and lay out the different side-effects
of changing how we do things. Back in the day, I thought it a perfectly sane
move to separate the regular ietf-announce list from the i-d-announce list.
Perhaps separating out Last Calls (with different possible variants, examples
above) makes sense too.
I did hear last night, as I've been hearing for a long time, that *something*
not-so-good is going on, and that we should at least consider the changes we
might make *and* consider side-effects of such changes before we make them.
We obviously shouldn't try to engineer on this list every last detail of how
things might work, but general ideas about how we might arrange things and
comments like Brian's about possible bad side-effects are exactly what we
need to be thinking about.
I think trying some discussion forum, such as Disqus or one of the things MCR
suggested would be a good experiment.
So we can choose 2-3 documents, and when they get to IETF LC, we add to the
announcement a message that says that for that document the discussion takes
place at this link.
Then we create a page with the text of the draft (+ iinks to the WG page and
mail archive), and add at the bottom a Disqus message widget. We can even make
the document shepherd the moderator for this forum.
IETF LC is supposed to get review and comments from the entire community. What
we heard at the plenary is that a large part of the community doesn’t want to
participate in the IETF mailing list. I think that would be a worthwhile
experiment.
Yoav