On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 2009-02-13 13:15, Noel Chiappa wrote:
> From: Clint Chaplin <clint(_dot_)chaplin(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
> I wouldn't create two places to send comments and attempt to segregate
> who can post to which group. However, creating an
ietf-comment(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
> email list and asking >all< last call comments to be sent to that
That also works for me.
I suppose it's better than sending them to this List of Last Resort
as we recommend today. But it's really important that the Subject
contains the draft name. Otherwise, sorting becomes a nightmare.
The radical alternative is of course a web-based method which ensures
that comments are logged and stored per-document, rather than arriving
as random email. That's also much harder to mail bomb.
Seems like a unique mailbox per lastcall would be very helpful all around.
Right now, gathering and evaluating comments must be a nightmare. An
alternative, would be a single LC mailbox as suggested, but require EVERY
subject line to carry the last call ID, preferable in a form sensible to
current mail clients.
In the case of unique lists per lastcall, provide an opt-in metasubcribe
to make it easy for folks who generally want to follow last call
discussions to just be subscribed.
*AND* require subscribe to post ... no cute confirm reply to bypass. I
strongly believe that anyone who wants to provide feedback should want
to see the comments on their feed back. [If the cute confirm created
an automatic 48 hour subscription as per my next point, that would
work too.]
*AND* no unsubscribe or post only for 48 hours after initial subscription.
For real participants, this wouldn't be an issue and for email campaigns,
well they just need to experience the same disrruption their campaign
causes.
David Morris
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf