Subject: List administration (fwd)

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:18:37 -0500 (EST)

Did this actually go out to the list?

Or did it get subjected to some special "filtering" in further violation 
of IETF policies.

I would appreciate it if some verizon customers would send me an 'ack'.

		--Dean

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:47:12 -0500 (EST)
From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: List administration

I was following this message from Nanog, in which Randy Bush is 
complaining about Verizon spam filtering.   What is alarming, is the 
change that Mr. Bush put into the PSG mail system, which also handles 
namedroppers email.

I think that if PSG does not have the resources to handle the mail for 
namedroppers without capriciously deleted mail, then it should be handed 
to someone else who does have the resources.

I would like to volunteer Av8 Internet as a more suitable and resourceful 
host for the namedroppers site.

I need not remind anyone of the past administration problems with Dan
Bernstein and others which have resulted in censure and administrative
changes to the administration of Namedroppers by PSG and Mr. Bush. These
problems have been repeated, and it seems that we are at the start of yet
another administration "problem".  It seems to me that no matter what we
do, we will never rid ourselves of a constant stream of administrative
problems if we keep the hosting the list at PSG.

By contrast, Av8 Internet has no political axe to grind over whose email
to send and whose to interfere with.  Av8 does not interfere with anyone's
email, nor will it ever capriciously delete anyone's email, nor will it
ever abuse its administrative privileges for personal harrassment.

Dean Anderson
CEO 
Av8 Internet, Inc

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 11:10:16 -0800
From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
To: Jared Mauch <[email-masked]>
Cc: Suresh Ramasubramanian <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: Re: incorrect spam setups cause spool messes on forwarders

> I think he's saying that they were unable to perform the
> validation hence the 450.  If the validation was successful,
> they'd return a 200 series code, if it was unsuccessful, they
> would return a 500 series code.

nice words, but crap.  due to needs to spool mail for sites in
countries with very poor connectivity, mail spool time here is
quite long.  if verizon and others seem unable to decide in weeks,
why should i pay the penalty?

but, i guess the problem is easily solved with exim config.  i have
set it so that if it can not deliver to verizon in say one hour, it
dumps the mail.

    verizon.net        *           F,1h,5m

life is simple, except for verizon users i guess.

randy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>

---

From: Dean Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:53:02 -0500 (EST)

At least one person seems to think my view is pretty unique, so if you are
concerned about this, perhaps some "me-too"s would help demonstrate that I
am not the only person with this concern.

I would like to have some confirmation from the Chairs that one of the
following has occured:

1) Randy was just exaggerating his threat to configure his servers to
delete mail queued for one hour, and that he has been properly chastised
for making such threats with respect to IETF list operation.

or

2) That Randy has changed the server config back so that he is no longer 
deleting IETF email, and has been properly chastised for deleting this 
email in violation of IETF policies, and chastised for making such changes 
without notification or approval.

I think many people would like to have an assurance that namedropper's
email is not being deleted before delivery, and that the queue time is at
least 3 days.  

Thanks,

		--Dean

---

From: "Al Costanzo" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 13:06:25 -0500

Dear IETF Chairs and members of the this mailing list:

I personally think Randy does a damn good job an unlike closed minded
indivuals he at listens to ideas.

If he has done something I am sure there is a good reason for it.  In the
years I have been associated with the IETF and this mailing list. I can name
at least one person that is fair and open minded and that is Randy.

IMHO Randy should not be chastised but applauded for all the work he has
done for the IETF.

Now these comments from me may come as a suprise to Randy since we have not
always seen eye to eye on a few things.

But if the IETF chairs want to do something to Randy, how about a pat on the
back and a thank you for a job well done!

Randy, believe or not. I always considered you helpful to me. Even when you
told me I couldn't do something or another.

Sincerely,

Al Costanzo
IETF contributor/member/sitter on the sidelines since 1979

---

From: [email-masked] (Ted Lindgreen)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 20:09:05 +0100

[Quoting Dean Anderson, on Dec  5, 18:10, in "Re: List administrat ..."]
> am not the only person with this concern.

I'm sorry, but I, and also a number of people I talked with the
past week, do NOT share your concern.  We all think Randy is doing
excellent job on the list administration and appreciate his work.

-- ted

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 14:07:44 -0500 (EST)

> IMHO Randy should not be chastised but applauded for all the work he has

For work he has done, he should be applauded. If he is dropping mails 
after 1 hour, for that he should be chastised.

--Len.

---

From: Greg Black <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 07:11:56 +1000

> excellent job on the list administration and appreciate his work.

If Randy is dropping email that cannot be delivered after a mere
hour, then we do *not* all think he's doing an excellent job on
the list administration -- some of us think that he's doing a
really lousy job of it if that allegation is true.  Certainly,
it is time for some responsible person to assure us that email
is not being dropped on the floor as a result of such a decision
(by Randy or anybody else).

Greg

---

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 13:33:38 -0800

If the IETF wants to get into this type of discussion it should do what most
other standards organizations do and exclusively provide the mailing list
facilities itself. Policy and practice for mailing list management may be
thus perfectly aligned.

Given the astonishing sums paid by ISOC to the secretariat to support the
RFC editor function this should be well in scope. 

I am not a Randy Bush fan. But attacking him for what amounts to parking
fines merely cheapens the case against the damage he has caused this group
in particular and the IETF in general.

This whole discussion should probably be taken to another list, I suggest,
"why are we in this handbasket and why do the roadsigns point to Hades?"

		Phill

---

From: Olaf Kolkman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 22:44:39 +0100

"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]> writes:
 * 
 * This whole discussion should probably be taken to another list

Thanks Philip, exactly my thinking.

The mail-list is prudently managed. I have confirmed that there are no
special delivery settings. All recipients are treated the same. (So to
use Phillip's metaphore, there was a parking ticket being waved, not
handed out).

To repeat the list policy:

   Moderation is based on "subscriber-only with spam filter".

   Questions or concerns related to the acceptance or rejection of
   specific messages to the namedroppers mailing list should first be
   discussed with the wg chairs, with followup appeals using the normal
   appeals process of rfc 2026 (i.e., follup with area directors, then
   iesg, etc.).

If there are problems in delivery, i.e. differences of what is in your 
mailbox and in the archive, please notify the chairs. We will not
troubleshoot individual problems because they could be caused by all kind 
of problems at the recipient end, however if there are patterns we will 
follow up.

Randy is doing a good job, he is doing it professionally and prudently!

This is the last mail on this topic. We have work to do.

--Olaf Kolkman
  DNSEXT Co-Chair