Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

James Galvin wrote: > Or did you mean some other form? Yes, not the "request list" form, I've never used it. I meant IETF -> lists -> note well -> other lists -> non-WG -> non-WG posting page (five clicks deep ;-) -> step 1 "add new entry" -> pro

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

-- On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:36 PM +0200 Frank Ellermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists -- > >| As a service to the community, the IETF Secretariat > >| operates a mailing list archive for working group

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Hi Cullen, On 2008-04-16 00:01 Cullen Jennings said the following: Hi Henrik, Seems this email about email still needs some more discussion - I have not been involved much with this much but I suspect that Chris Newman would probably be the best person on the IESG to work with on both cla

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > > On 2008-04-15 16:59 James Galvin said the following: > > > > -- On Monday, April 14, 2008 10:25 PM +0200 Henrik Levkowetz > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: IESG Statement on Spam > > Control on IETF Mailing Lists -- > >

RE: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

scussion Subject: Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 08:13:23PM +0200, Eliot Lear wrote: > I think there is probably convenience value to housing the mailing lists > at the IETF. It allows for a single whitelist, reduction in those > anno

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

James Galvin wrote: Hi, thanks for the explanation, I add some notes of what I think this means, please correct me if I got it wrong. [2418] >| As a service to the community, the IETF Secretariat >| operates a mailing list archive for working group >| mailing lists. Most lists I submitted to t

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

On 2008-04-15 16:59 James Galvin said the following: > > -- On Monday, April 14, 2008 10:25 PM +0200 Henrik Levkowetz > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: IESG Statement on Spam > Control on IETF Mailing Lists -- > >>> * IETF mailing lists MUST prov

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 08:13:23PM +0200, Eliot Lear wrote: > I think there is probably convenience value to housing the mailing lists > at the IETF. It allows for a single whitelist, reduction in those > annoying monthly messages that we eventually all filter into the > bitbucket. I'll concur

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

-- On Monday, April 14, 2008 2:11 PM -0700 Ned Freed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists -- > > +1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs > > that he comments on are algorithmically possible. >

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

nded then I agree completely with Henrik. Jim -- On Tuesday, April 15, 2008 9:00 AM +1200 Brian E Carpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists -- > +1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs > that he co

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

-- On Monday, April 14, 2008 10:25 PM +0200 Henrik Levkowetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists -- > > * IETF mailing lists MUST provide a mechanism for legitimate > > technical participants to determine if an a

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

- Original Message - From: "Tom.Petch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Eliot Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "IETF Discussion" Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 6:09 AM Subject: Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists > - Origin

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

-- On Monday, April 14, 2008 8:58 PM +0200 Frank Ellermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists -- > Russ Housley wrote: > > > When IETF lists are housed somewhere other than ietf.org, > > they are suppos

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

- Original Message - From: "Eliot Lear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Russ Housley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "IETF Discussion" Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 8:13 PM Subject: Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists > > Russ, >

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

- Original Message - From: "IESG Secretary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "IETF Announcement list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 5:39 PM Subject: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists > The f

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Having a single system for all WG lists has the appeal that whatever process(es) handle the lists, it will be the same for all lists, so you don't have to figure out how N different lists are run. As a shameless plug, we have a free open source solution developed here which is widely used against

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

On 2008-04-15 05:12 Ned Freed said the following: >> On 2008-04-15 00:35 Ned Freed said the following: On 2008-04-14 23:11 Ned Freed said the following: > >>> I guess I should be flattered, but really, I fail to see why. Guaranteed >>> bypass >>> of moderation is simply an allowed-poster wh

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

> Hi - > > From: "Ned Freed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Henrik Levkowetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Ned Freed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 9:12 PM > > Subject: Re: IESG Statement on

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

>> > * IETF mailing lists MUST provide a mechanism for legitimate technical >> > participants to bypass moderation, challenge-response, or other techniques >> > that would interfere with a prompt technical debate on the mailing list >> > without requiring such participants to receive list traffic.

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

> > The following principles apply to spam control on IETF mailing lists: > > > > * IETF mailing lists MUST provide spam control. > > * Such spam control SHOULD track accepted practices used on the Internet. > These two bullets are well-intentioned, but have no clear meaning. Simply > put, > the

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Hi - > From: "Ned Freed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Henrik Levkowetz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Ned Freed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 9:12 PM > Subject: Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mail

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

> On 2008-04-15 00:35 Ned Freed said the following: > >> On 2008-04-14 23:11 Ned Freed said the following: > > I guess I should be flattered, but really, I fail to see why. Guaranteed > > bypass > > of moderation is simply an allowed-poster whitelist. > So it seems to me that you've failed to s

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

On 2008-04-15 00:35 Ned Freed said the following: >> On 2008-04-14 23:11 Ned Freed said the following: > I guess I should be flattered, but really, I fail to see why. Guaranteed > bypass > of moderation is simply an allowed-poster whitelist. So it seems to me that you've failed to see the prob

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

> On 2008-04-14 23:11 Ned Freed said the following: > >> +1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs > >> that he comments on are algorithmically possible. > > > > These two MUSTs (the ability to whitelist specific posters without them > > having > > to receive list mail and spam rejecti

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Dear IESG, IESG Secretary wrote: > The following principles apply to spam control on IETF mailing lists: > > * IETF mailing lists MUST provide spam control. > * Such spam control SHOULD track accepted practices used on the Internet. These two bullets are well-intentioned, but have no clear mean

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

On 2008-04-14 23:11 Ned Freed said the following: >> +1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs >> that he comments on are algorithmically possible. > > These two MUSTs (the ability to whitelist specific posters without them having > to receive list mail and spam rejection) are both com

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

On 2008-04-15 09:11, Ned Freed wrote: >> +1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs >> that he comments on are algorithmically possible. > > These two MUSTs (the ability to whitelist specific posters without them having > to receive list mail and spam rejection) are both completely trivi

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

> +1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs > that he comments on are algorithmically possible. These two MUSTs (the ability to whitelist specific posters without them having to receive list mail and spam rejection) are both completely trivial to implement with our software. The latter

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

+1 to Henrik's comments. I don't think the two MUSTs that he comments on are algorithmically possible. Brian On 2008-04-15 08:25, Henrik Levkowetz wrote: > Hi, > > On 2008-04-14 17:39 IESG Secretary said the following: >> The following principles apply to spam control on IETF mailing lists:

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

> >> -Original Message- >> From: Russ Housley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:25 AM >> To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip >> Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

RE: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

tf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists > > Phill: > > When IETF lists are housed somewhere other than ietf.org, > they are supposed to include an archive recipient so that > there is an archive available at ietf.org

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Hi, On 2008-04-14 17:39 IESG Secretary said the following: > The following principles apply to spam control on IETF mailing lists: > > * IETF mailing lists MUST provide spam control. > * Such spam control SHOULD track accepted practices used on the Internet. > * IETF mailing lists MUST provide a

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Russ Housley wrote: > When IETF lists are housed somewhere other than ietf.org, > they are supposed to include an archive recipient so that > there is an archive available at ietf.org Makes sense. I have submitted some lists to "other lists", how is this archive recipient magic arranged ? Fra

Re: [dkim unverified] Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Eliot Lear wrote: > Russ, > > >> When IETF lists are housed somewhere other than ietf.org, they are >> supposed to include an archive recipient so that there is an archive >> available at ietf.org (perhaps in addition to the one kept at the >> place where the list is housed). >> >> >

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

Russ, > When IETF lists are housed somewhere other than ietf.org, they are > supposed to include an archive recipient so that there is an archive > available at ietf.org (perhaps in addition to the one kept at the > place where the list is housed). > I'll agree with Phill's conclusion on t

RE: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

list > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org > > Subject: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists > > > > The following principles apply to spam control on IETF mailing lists: > > > > * IETF mailing lists MUST provide spam control. > > * Such

Re: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would suggest that the IESG also think about hosting all IETF lists in > house in the future. > > The main reason for this is legal, a list that is maintained by the IETF > is much more satisfactory in a patent

RE: IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

you might imagine. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of IESG Secretary > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 8:40 AM > To: IETF Announcement list > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ietf@ietf.org > Subject: IESG Statement on Spa

IESG Statement on Spam Control on IETF Mailing Lists

The following principles apply to spam control on IETF mailing lists: * IETF mailing lists MUST provide spam control. * Such spam control SHOULD track accepted practices used on the Internet. * IETF mailing lists MUST provide a mechanism for legitimate technical participants to bypass moderation,