I am responding to Russ' original message, because it is too hard to pick one
of the 52 responses received so far. A quick count is something like 10
thinking this is a good idea with the remainder thinking this idea ranks
somewhere between really bad and evil.
Apps Area people who have
Russ Housley wrote:
Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
in a place for downloading with a web browser. This would be
a significant change to current practice, so the community
needs to consider this potential
Michael Richardson wrote:
Cyrus == Cyrus Daboo cy...@daboo.name writes:
Cyrus Along those lines how about setting up an IETF IMAP server
Cyrus with mailboxes for each mailing list hosted by the IETF? That
Cyrus way anyone with a capable IMAP client (one that can
How about we use
- Original Message -
From: Russ Housley hous...@vigilsec.com
To: IETF ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:46 AM
Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
in a place for downloading with a web
Pete == Pete Resnick presn...@qualcomm.com writes:
Pete (*mumble*) Folks, let's please not try to engineer around user
Pete silliness. User silliness will occur no matter what tools we
Pete provide.
Pete Anybody can get a place on Dropbox or elsewhere and put a URL
Pete to
In article 4f6236e6.5030...@nostrum.com you write:
The current plan is to investigate both a web based archive access
mechanism and an IMAP based one.
Don't forget NNTP (RFC 3977). I use it locally, deliver list mail to
local per-list newsgroups, and it works really well.
R's,
John
On 03/16/2012 12:39 PM, John Levine wrote:
In article4f6236e6.5030...@nostrum.com you write:
The current plan is to investigate both a web based archive access
mechanism and an IMAP based one.
Don't forget NNTP (RFC 3977). I use it locally, deliver list mail to
local per-list newsgroups,
Is this really a big enough problem to be worth solving? I can't
recall a single instance where I received IETF list with a problematic
attachment.
i travel to places with very poor bandwidth. it is a problem.
and the vast majority of users just do not get it. we send 20mb
documents around
I suppose I could live with this - but not actively support it - if
the stripping was limited to abusively large attachments - say ones
over 5Mb or thereabouts. But otherwise it's a TERRIBLE idea, and will
simply result in everyone including the draft or whatever in the
primary message text
Hi Russ,
On 3/15/12 12:46 AM, Russ Housley wrote:
Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
in a place for downloading with a web browser. This would be
a significant change to current practice, so the community
Is this really a big enough problem to be worth solving? I can't
recall a single instance where I received IETF list with a problematic
attachment.
i travel to places with very poor bandwidth. it is a problem.
and the vast majority of users just do not get it. we send 20mb
documents
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 8:07 AM, Francesco Gennai
francesco.gen...@isti.cnr.it wrote:
Is this really a big enough problem to be worth solving? I can't
recall a single instance where I received IETF list with a problematic
attachment.
i travel to places with very poor bandwidth. it is a
It will be more work, but going to mixed connectivity solution
addresses the old, current and new. Going online will serve better
the rebirth on online connectivity, mixed bandwidths and smaller
devices. Using forums via web, newsgroups with email components has
long been part of the
+1 on having two options, by some means. Having a low bandwidth
distribution of text only is a very good idea, but there are more
people who want attachments intact, and problems in having the
stripped version be the archive version. If it's too difficult to
provide an option, I apologize to
ned == ned ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com writes:
ned Is this really a big enough problem to be worth solving? I
ned can't recall a single instance where I received IETF list with
ned a problematic attachment. OTOH, I routinely get IETF messages
ned with useful attachements -
Russ == Russ Housley hous...@vigilsec.com writes:
Russ Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
Russ There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
Russ in a place for downloading with a web browser. This would be
Russ a significant change to
On 3/14/2012 4:46 PM, Russ Housley wrote:
Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
in a place for downloading with a web browser. This would be
a significant change to current practice, so the community
needs to
Hi,
--On March 14, 2012 11:48:08 PM -0400 John C Klensin john-i...@jck.com
wrote:
Let me add to the reasons the observation that there are still
some of us who read IETF mailing lists on airplanes or in other
environments with limited, expensive, or zero connectivity. If
everything is in
On Thu Mar 15 01:28:00 2012, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 2012-03-15 13:33, ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
...
I suppose I could live with this - but not actively support it -
if the
stripping was limited to abusively large attachments - say ones
over 5Mb or
thereabouts.
+0.9; maybe
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 00:00 -0400 Ross Callon
rcal...@juniper.net wrote:
I don't like this proposal for two reasons: I frequently read
email while not connected; When connected, bandwidths have
gotten high enough that attachments on the most part are not
slowing things down in an
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 09:41 -0400 Cyrus Daboo
cy...@daboo.name wrote:
...
Along those lines how about setting up an IETF IMAP server
with mailboxes for each mailing list hosted by the IETF? That
way anyone with a capable IMAP client (one that can separately
download text and
On Mar 15, 2012, at 6:47 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 00:00 -0400 Ross Callon
rcal...@juniper.net wrote:
I don't like this proposal for two reasons: I frequently read
email while not connected; When connected, bandwidths have
gotten high enough that
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Lixia Zhang li...@cs.ucla.edu wrote:
On Mar 15, 2012, at 6:47 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 00:00 -0400 Ross Callon
rcal...@juniper.net wrote:
I don't like this proposal for two reasons: I frequently read
email while not
Is this really a big enough problem to be worth solving? I can't
recall a single instance where I received IETF list with a problematic
attachment.
i travel to places with very poor bandwidth. it is a problem.
and the vast majority of users just do not get it. we send 20mb
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 03/15/2012 07:43 AM, Lixia Zhang wrote:
On Mar 15, 2012, at 6:47 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 00:00 -0400 Ross Callon
rcal...@juniper.net wrote:
I don't like this proposal for two reasons: I frequently
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:03:50AM -0700, ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
Or better still, don't strip anything. Use a reasonably capable client and
that doesn't fetch attachments unless you tell it to.
Yes. What problem is this proposal to do anything about attachments
trying to solve?
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 00:00 -0400 Ross Callon
rcal...@juniper.net wrote:
I don't like this proposal for two reasons: I frequently read
email while not connected; When connected, bandwidths have
gotten high enough that attachments on the most part are not
slowing things down in
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 09:47:57AM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
Borrowing a bit from Randy, the solution to really large
attachments is to ban them. Personally, I'd find it perfectly
reasonable to have any message in the megabyte range or above
(or probably even an order of magnitude smaller)
On 3/15/12 8:41 AM, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
Along those lines how about setting up an IETF IMAP server with
mailboxes for each mailing list hosted by the IETF?
There has been a discussion under way for some time to get that to
happen. I believe RFP's are being thought about (or written).
pr
--
for who has problem in attachment downloading the solution should be
at the delivery Message Store level, where the strip of the
attachment could be
done accordingly to an user configurable mailbox parameter
(as we do on our server, where we call it Easy Delivery).
There is no option in
Is this really a big enough problem to be worth solving? I can't
recall a single instance where I received IETF list with a problematic
attachment.
i travel to places with very poor bandwidth. it is a problem.
and the vast majority of users just do not get it. we send 20mb
From: Russ Housley hous...@vigilsec.com
There is no option in Mailman to specify attachment-stripping by
user, only by list.
So? Have 'ietf@ietf.org' send a copy to to a new list, 'ietf-strippedietf.org'
(the latter being set in Mailman to strip), and those who prefer their IETF
Russ == Russ Housley hous...@vigilsec.com writes:
Russ Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
Russ There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
Russ in a place for downloading with a web browser. This would be
Russ a significant change to
On 3/15/2012 10:41 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
(This whole discussion is so typical of the IETF: what should be a 30-second
exercise for one person to deal with in a simple, obvious way turns into a
multi-day discussion in which some try to redesign entire email systems.)
Noel,
We have a
Hi Pete,
--On March 15, 2012 10:49:25 AM -0500 Pete Resnick presn...@qualcomm.com
wrote:
Along those lines how about setting up an IETF IMAP server with
mailboxes for each mailing list hosted by the IETF?
There has been a discussion under way for some time to get that to
happen. I believe
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 08:16 -0700 Ned Freed
ned.fr...@mrochek.com wrote:
...
It might be okay for really large attachments, as long as
only a few messages are affected.
Borrowing a bit from Randy, the solution to really large
attachments is to ban them. Personally, I'd find it
Is this really a big enough problem to be worth solving? I can't
recall a single instance where I received IETF list with a problematic
attachment.
i travel to places with very poor bandwidth. it is a problem.
and the vast majority of users just do not get it. we send
Cyrus == Cyrus Daboo cy...@daboo.name writes:
Cyrus Along those lines how about setting up an IETF IMAP server
Cyrus with mailboxes for each mailing list hosted by the IETF? That
Cyrus way anyone with a capable IMAP client (one that can
How about we use the protocol that was
The current plan is to investigate both a web based archive access
mechanism and an IMAP based one.
I split the requirements for them into two drafts so the projects could
be pursued separately.
See also https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sparks-genarea-imaparch/
On 3/15/12 12:57 PM,
John, I agree completely with everything you say here.
Ned
--On Thursday, March 15, 2012 08:16 -0700 Ned Freed
ned.fr...@mrochek.com wrote:
...
It might be okay for really large attachments, as long as
only a few messages are affected.
Borrowing a
On 3/15/2012 8:49 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
There has been a discussion under way for some time to get that to happen. I
believe RFP's are being thought about (or written).
we have just entered the RFI stage. I see that as progress.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
On 3/15/12 1:38 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
we have just entered the RFI stage. I see that as progress.
For draft-sparks-genarea-imaparch, or just draft-sparks-genarea-mailarch?
pr
--
Pete Resnickhttp://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax:
On 3/15/12 1:40 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 3/15/12 1:38 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
we have just entered the RFI stage. I see that as progress.
For draft-sparks-genarea-imaparch, or just draft-sparks-genarea-mailarch?
Nevermind. I am told it is for the latter. The former is being handled
Since the problem is a relative handful of large attachments, could a
solution just be to provide a repository for
mailing list members to store such files, yielding a URL they could
use in an email ? Then, the usual list feedback
would keep the attachment sizes manageable.
Obviously, there would
Since the problem is a relative handful of large attachments, could a
solution just be to provide a repository for
mailing list members to store such files, yielding a URL they could
use in an email ? Then, the usual list feedback
would keep the attachment sizes manageable.
(*mumble*) Folks,
Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
in a place for downloading with a web browser. This would be
a significant change to current practice, so the community
needs to consider this potential policy change.
What do
Hello Russ,
IMHO this is a great idea and I fully support it's deployment asap. It
is well overdue one too not only in IETF but in many other mailing lists
in the community.
--
The only few maybe too detailed at this point questions:
- what would be (if not infinity) the expiration data of
Some suggestions have been made about the IETF mail lists.
There is a way for mailman to strip attachments and put them
in a place for downloading with a web browser. This would be
a significant change to current practice, so the community
needs to consider this potential policy change.
Sounds like a good idea ... I'd add one more question to the list below
... How would these attachments appear in the archive? Are they already
linked objects, must be I guess, would that change?
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012, Robert Raszuk wrote:
Hello Russ,
IMHO this is a great idea and I fully
On 2012-03-15 13:33, ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
...
I suppose I could live with this - but not actively support it - if the
stripping was limited to abusively large attachments - say ones over 5Mb or
thereabouts.
+0.9; maybe set the limit a bit lower, for those who still have network
On Thursday, March 15, 2012 02:28:00 PM Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 2012-03-15 13:33, ned+i...@mauve.mrochek.com wrote:
...
I suppose I could live with this - but not actively support it - if the
stripping was limited to abusively large attachments - say ones over 5Mb
or thereabouts.
--On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 21:44 -0400 Scott Kitterman
sc...@kitterman.com wrote:
...
But otherwise it's a TERRIBLE idea, and will simply result
in everyone including the draft or whatever in the primary
message text in order to avoid this nonsense, which results
in a degradation of
a few messages
are affected.
Ross
-Original Message-
From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Russ
Housley
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 7:46 PM
To: IETF
Subject: Issues relating to managing a mailing list...
Some suggestions have been made about the IETF
Since there's no way to pick one choice which will make most people happy
(whichever one is picked, the proponents of the other will be unhappy), maybe
we should try and avoid making a choice? We could have two different back-end
distributions versions of the list: one which strips attachments,
54 matches
Mail list logo
