Subject: RE: Submission of Internet Drafts

From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2004 12:01:52 +0200

Aaron, do you realise you just created a trouble ticket by cc:-ing 
the iesg-secretary? And if other WG chairs do a "Reply All" they will
create a new ticket for each of those... and they cannot (easily)
see they are all non-tickets and linked to the same origin.

Please... remove the iesg-secretary from the cc: line when you 
respond to these postings...

Thanks, Bert

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Falk [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 22:15
> To: Ralph Droms
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Submission of Internet Drafts
> 
> 
> Ralph-
> 
> The proper action is to send a note to [email-masked] to get a 
> trouble ticket established.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --aaron
> 
> 
> On Sep 3, 2004, at 12:31 PM, Ralph Droms wrote:
> 
> > There seems to be a problem with submission of Internet Drafts.  In 
> > response to e-mail sent [email-masked], I received the 
> > following error message:
> >
> > A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
> > recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) 
> > failed:
> >
> >   pipe to |/home/mlee/RELEASE/idsubmission.pl
> >     generated by [email-masked]
> >     local delivery failed
> >
> > The following text was generated during the delivery attempt:
> >
> > ------ pipe to |/home/mlee/RELEASE/idsubmission.pl
> >        generated by [email-masked] ------
> >
> > Can't open perl script "/home/mlee/RELEASE/idsubmission.pl": 
> > Permission denied
> >
> >
> > - Ralph Droms
> 
> 
>

---

From: Aaron Falk <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2004 15:21:06 -0700

> respond to these postings...

Oops.  No, Bert, I hadn't realized that.  I have a lot of trouble 
keeping track of the difference between iesg-secretary and 
ietf-secretariat.  Unfortunately, http://www.ietf.org/IESG/poc.html 
doesn't help at all.

--aaron

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 12:12:50 +0200

--On søndag, september 05, 2004 15:21:06 -0700 Aaron Falk <[email-masked]> 
wrote:

> Oops.  No, Bert, I hadn't realized that.  I have a lot of trouble keeping
> track of the difference between iesg-secretary and ietf-secretariat.
> Unfortunately, http://www.ietf.org/IESG/poc.html doesn't help at all.

"ietf-secretariat" is an address you can safely forget. I hope it's an 
alias to iesg-secretary, but am not sure.
There are two important addresses, both of which feed trouble ticket 
systems:

- [email-masked]: Administrative matters such as milestones, 
charters, procedure errors, requests for publication and so on.

- [email-masked]: Technical brokenness, servers that are down, 
scripts that bounce mail and so on.

Neither one belongs in the "cc" line of a Reply.
Hope that helps!

                  Harald

---

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 09:15:22 -0700

>"ietf-secretariat" is an address you can safely forget.

Unfortunately, when you forget them all and then try to come up with
the right one, e.g. based on the wording in RFC 2026, you end up finding
things like:

   A standards action is initiated by a recommendation by the IETF
   Working group responsible for a specification to its Area Director,
   copied to the IETF Secretariat

and spend time trying to find the address for the IETF Secretariat.
google certainly makes "[email-masked]" nice and easy to
find on www.ietf.org when you ask about "IETF Secretariat".  So I
hope it works.  I was burned by this about 8 years ago, when as a
WG chair I wanted to submit my first document.  I eventually helped
get http://www.ietf.org/IESG/wgchairs.html created based on that
experience, but it seems like there is still conflicting information
easily available.

>charters, procedure errors, requests for publication and so on.

http://www.ietf.org/instructions/Milestone.html says to use
ietf-action for milestones.  http://www.ietf.org/IESG/poc.html
says to also use ietf-action for email address changes.  :-(

  Bill

---

From: [email-masked] (scott bradner)
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 12:35:25 -0400 (EDT)

after 2026 was compleeted it was noted that no email address had been
provided for the IETF Secretariat - this was fixed in RFC 2418

   Updated milestones are renegotiated with the Area Director and the
   IESG, as needed, and then are submitted to the IESG Secretariat:
   [email-masked].

The address "[email-masked]" does not appear in our standards
process documents (it does appear in RFC 3160 but only as a place to
ask about IPR issues)

Scott

---

From: Aaron Falk <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 18:32:15 -0700

This is all dreadfully confusing.  I suggest a clearly worded 
'contacts' page off the www.ietf.org root page.  As  I mentioned 
earlier, the one at http://www.ietf.org/IESG/poc.html doesn't give any 
helpful context.

--aaron

---

From: [email-masked] (scott bradner)
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 21:40:55 -0400 (EDT)

makes too much sense :-)

---
>From [email-masked]  Mon Sep  6 21:32:50 2004
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
From: Aaron Falk <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Submission of Internet Drafts
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 18:32:15 -0700
To: [email-masked] (scott bradner)

--aaron