Mailing list centralization (Re: comments on WG rechartering procedures)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>]

--On 10. september 2003 09:52 -0400 Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com> 
wrote:

> > We have runnng code that mailing lists are being created prior to
> > official WG creation. I surely hope we aren't about to change that,
> > and the above wording leaves me uncomfortable that we're maybe
> > changing running code.
>
> More than this...  Some ADs require that there is an active mailing
> list, with substantive discussion, before agreeing to a BOF.  It can
> be difficult to move these lists later.
>
> Are we actively trying, at this point, to consolidate IETF mailing
> lists to the secretariat/ietf.org?  If so, why?  If not, then we
> don't necessarily have any say in how/when/if a mailing list gets
> created.

We used to have a strict rule that mailing lists were not created @ietf.org 
unless the working group was already chartered.
Because of this, @ietf.org was used more for moving mailing lists that had 
lost their home than for new WGs.

That rule has been relaxed informally to somewhere between "if the IESG 
wants it, it gets created" and "if an AD asks for it, it gets created" - 
this has led to a multiplicity of mailing lists, and Barbara is wondering 
whether we have properly considered the cost to the secretariat of running 
the mailing lists, and whether we should have a slightly higher bar for 
creating them.

The advantage of centralization is that we get somewhat consistent 
management. The disadvantages are single point of failure and support 
coming out of secretariat resources.