Dear RIPE community, At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here: - https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115 I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change. There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions: - Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry? The text below is similar to something I shared with the WG Chairs several months ago. Kind regards,. Leo ripe-781 describes four fundamental principles supporting our policy development process. The first two principles are openness and transparency. Changes in the treatment of e-mail by large industry players presents a challenge to these two principles. In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, have made discussion mailing lists less effective. Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when their e-mail services provider treats them as junk. When a legitimate message to a RIPE discussion list is treated as junk the sender's voice has been moderated by a third-party mail provider. RIPE's transparency is diminished when its discussion lists are subjected to gatekeeping by third-party mail providers. In 1992, e-mail was an improvement to postal services and telephony protocols. In 2023, we have a wide choice of communication protocols and platforms. I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world. We must offer all current and potential participants in RIPE an effective set of tools. Any tools we use must support the principles of openness and transparency. An ideal set of tools might have features like this: 1. An open protocol available for implementation by anyone. 2. Free(ly available) software implementations for popular operating systems (Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows). 3. Allows a user to choose to have activity pushed to them. They must not be forced to maintain a login to be informed of activity they are interested in. 4. A public archive that cannot be retrospectively edited (barring exceptional situations). While the technology choices need to support the principles of openness and transparency, they do not need to do all the work. Announcements, blog posts, and other kinds of communications can be built into our processes. The combination of technology and process can make the whole more effective.
Hi, On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 09:41:59AM +0200, Leo Vegoda wrote:
There was more discussion than I expected. I???m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
This is a hard problem - we tried with the WG lists and the forums, and the results are not convincing. On the mailing list, you have the old hands (like me) that can't really get themselves to like all the newfangled "you need a web browser" communication forms (forum, slack, teams, ...) - and you lose the youngfolks that do not do e-mails. One of the big advantages of e-mail is the asynchronity of communication, as in "I do not have to be awake to follow a discussion that started in a different timezone, and reply to it". One of the big disadvantages of e-mail is the asynchronity of communication, as in "this reply to something which was written many days ago is drowned by a communication thread that has long drifted to a different topic"... And whatever we do, anything I've seen so far does not truly scale beyond "a few handful of active participants" - a mail thread with 1000 active participants will overwhelm readers as much as a teams or forums discussion, or a videocall... this is the really hard problem I see. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
On Fri 2023-05-26 10:31:16+0200 Gert wrote:
One of the big advantages of e-mail is the asynchronity of communication, as in "I do not have to be awake to follow a discussion that started in a different timezone, and reply to it".
+1. I think discord or some other 'chat' medium is fine for "I need support for X *right now*", but horrible for longer discussions with multiple people.
One of the big disadvantages of e-mail is the asynchronity of communication, as in "this reply to something which was written many days ago is drowned by a communication thread that has long drifted to a different topic"...
And whatever we do, anything I've seen so far does not truly scale beyond "a few handful of active participants" - a mail thread with 1000 active participants will overwhelm readers as much as a teams or forums discussion, or a videocall... this is the really hard problem I see.
Yes, but at least email has threading to group subjects together so you can easily review/ignore/delete/archive. Following a long multi-participant discussion in chat rooms is nigh impossible. Even if the platform has a way to 'reply to thread', many people aren't aware of it. /Robert
On 26 May 2023, at 08:41, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future?
Yes and yes. IMO.
- Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
Yes. IMO. Email has the lowest barrier to entry and imposes no meaningful requirements on the end user other than an ability to type in English using the email client of their choice. There's no reliance on proprietary protocols or platforms. These key points need to be remembered. In my view, chasing after the latest shiny here today, gone tomorrow fad would be unwise. [Once upon a time, myspace was a thing.] Or adopting some proprietary platform. Or ending up with a platform that gets assimilated by a tech behemoth or imposes limitations on community-generated content. Some of us remember the Slideshare debacle ~15 years ago. The intention was to make stuff from RIPE meetings "more available" - for some definition of that term. However the company's T&Cs meant they asserted IPR on anything that was uploaded and you agreed to accept their spam. Advocating change is all very well. But be careful what you wish for because you might just get it. And then find there are unintended and/or unforseen consequences. It can be helpful to have discussions about from time to time topics like this. Periodic reviews are welcome and I support that. However I think these discussions need to be grounded in objective data: clear problem statement, requirements, use cases, etc. If not, we'll end up with a circular debate -- "My opinion is right", "No it's not." etc -- that goes nowhere. We're engineers - allegedly. So let's define/agree a problem statement first so we can figure out what options could be used to fix whatever is broken.
Leo & all - I do share your assessment of the current state of the email union: having been a lurker on <mailop@mailop.org> for almost two years now definitely cured me from believing that everything is basically still fine with some exceptions - it's rather the other way around. The question however is - and I have put this up already yesterday during the session - whether this community of Internet systems operating people would just accept this as a matter of fact and so effectively carve in. Or whether there is enough people around in this community to say "Enough of your email oddities, GAFA!" (or whatever the acronym of the day is for this group of Internet businesses), to put the feet in the ground and to get this fixed. And as a side observation with an explicit eye on yesterday's last session on diversity: it seems that we are getting more diversity on the social layer of our industry - which is good! - but we are losing diversity at an even higher rate on the technical layer. Beste Grüße -C. On 26.05.2023 09:41, Leo Vegoda wrote:
Dear RIPE community,
At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here:
- https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115
I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change.
There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
The text below is similar to something I shared with the WG Chairs several months ago.
Kind regards,.
Leo
ripe-781 describes four fundamental principles supporting our policy development process. The first two principles are openness and transparency.
Changes in the treatment of e-mail by large industry players presents a challenge to these two principles.
In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, have made discussion mailing lists less effective.
Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when their e-mail services provider treats them as junk.
When a legitimate message to a RIPE discussion list is treated as junk the sender's voice has been moderated by a third-party mail provider. RIPE's transparency is diminished when its discussion lists are subjected to gatekeeping by third-party mail providers.
In 1992, e-mail was an improvement to postal services and telephony protocols. In 2023, we have a wide choice of communication protocols and platforms.
I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world.
We must offer all current and potential participants in RIPE an effective set of tools. Any tools we use must support the principles of openness and transparency.
An ideal set of tools might have features like this:
1. An open protocol available for implementation by anyone. 2. Free(ly available) software implementations for popular operating systems (Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows). 3. Allows a user to choose to have activity pushed to them. They must not be forced to maintain a login to be informed of activity they are interested in. 4. A public archive that cannot be retrospectively edited (barring exceptional situations).
While the technology choices need to support the principles of openness and transparency, they do not need to do all the work. Announcements, blog posts, and other kinds of communications can be built into our processes.
The combination of technology and process can make the whole more effective.
Hi Leo! On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 09:41, Leo Vegoda <[leo@vegoda.org](mailto:On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 09:41, Leo Vegoda <<a href=)> wrote:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
I find e-mail far preferable to slack-like things, certainly far preferable to web-like things in general. I have abandoned all social media in the interests of living a more pleasant life. E-mail for me is about all that is left. However, I am old and rubbish and I don't think the requirements of dinosaurs should drive decisions about the future of mammals. I do think a simple comparison of the traffic on this list and the size of the community suggests that something is a bit out of whack. Maybe e-mail is a poor tool for discussions; maybe people have nothing to say; maybe a big audience is intimidating; maybe dinosaurs are annoying. It seems very possible that the answer to these kinds of questions lie in sociology and not engineering. Joe
Hi Leo, all: You raise a fair question, Leo. However, I'm also inclined to think that we're going a bit in circles. As others have highlighted, we have tried other channels (like the Forum, but not exclusively that), and it's not really worked. There's also multiple social media channels, a Telegram channel, and other formal and informal communications methods. I think there's merit in experimenting with new methods and channels (I think starting a RIPE DIscord channel, for instance, would be great if there's not one already). But email continues to be the most reliable form of communication I've come across throughout the Internet community, as it allows for asynchronous communication in an organised way (based on interests and sub-communities), anyone can easily join (via the signup form) as well as unsubscribe or switch to a digest, it's easily archivable, and it's easy to translate / accessible. I agree with Joe that it's a sociological, not engineering issue – i.e., how we make people feel welcome, how we communicate with each other, and how we collectively agree to share information. For these reasons, I think it would be a shame to eliminate the lists. Other methods can complement if necessary/desired, but shouldn't replace IMO. Best, -Michael Oghia On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 1:18 PM Joe Abley <jabley@strandkip.nl> wrote:
Hi Leo!
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 09:41, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org <On+Fri,+May+26,+2023+at+09:41,+Leo+Vegoda+%3C%3Ca+href=>> wrote:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
I find e-mail far preferable to slack-like things, certainly far preferable to web-like things in general. I have abandoned all social media in the interests of living a more pleasant life. E-mail for me is about all that is left. However, I am old and rubbish and I don't think the requirements of dinosaurs should drive decisions about the future of mammals.
I do think a simple comparison of the traffic on this list and the size of the community suggests that something is a bit out of whack. Maybe e-mail is a poor tool for discussions; maybe people have nothing to say; maybe a big audience is intimidating; maybe dinosaurs are annoying.
It seems very possible that the answer to these kinds of questions lie in sociology and not engineering.
Joe
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
there used to be, and i assume still are, irc channels where net ops hang out. that no one here mentions them may be a clue. one issue may be scale. a chat medium with a dozen or so folk is viable. we have a slack with a small cabal who admin a few pops, and it works well. a chat with a thousand net ops would likely have volume and s:n to deter most folk execpt the underemployed. heck, this list often causes me to use thread-delete. randy
Right, there is IRC as well. But as Discord this sometimes got really distracted and chatty. Mail is still easy to handle and to search. And everybody has it. And I agree to Jim, it is self-fulfilling … 😉 -- Kind Regards Sebastian Becker Von: ripe-list <ripe-list-bounces@ripe.net> im Auftrag von Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Datum: Sonntag, 28. Mai 2023 um 11:41 An: RIPE List <ripe-list@ripe.net> Betreff: Re: [ripe-list] The Future of Discussion Lists there used to be, and i assume still are, irc channels where net ops hang out. that no one here mentions them may be a clue. one issue may be scale. a chat medium with a dozen or so folk is viable. we have a slack with a small cabal who admin a few pops, and it works well. a chat with a thousand net ops would likely have volume and s:n to deter most folk execpt the underemployed. heck, this list often causes me to use thread-delete. randy -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 12:59:59PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
there used to be, and i assume still are, irc channels where net ops hang out. that no one here mentions them may be a clue.
I like IRC and host IRC servers. Remco once said: "Even to this day, IRC is the 'debug enable verbose' of the global routing system." https://twitter.com/rvmNL/status/1464922675101450245 RIPE community members create channels via platforms like slack, irc, discord, whatsapp, mattermost, telegram, signal; and then (some of) those channels go out of fashion again. It seems only natural that people create non-public backchannels which come and go. To me, any inability to publicly reference messages, would seem an impediment when collectively reasoning about policy for the public Internet. Kind regards, Job ps. Elsewhere in this thread someone implied "only old people use email", this seems wide of the mark. In my experience people of all ages use email.
Looking at the people who replied to this thread so far, this discussion appears to have all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Gert, Jim, Joe… All people I’ve known for over a decade or more in the RIPE Community, saying on a mailing list that they prefer email. :) I guess it’s no surprise that none of the younger generation, or people who do not like email (style) communications, are here to say that they prefer something else instead. They’re all on on Discord servers like DisNOG, BGPeople, or the RPKI Community server talking to like-minded people, solving problems and having a good time. I would really hope we can at least get beyond the point of acknowledging that mailing lists are not for everyone. But even then, we can do a ton of research looking of the holy grail of platforms that is open source, decentralised, publicly archived, freely available, has favourable Terms and Conditions, and what have you. There’s a good chance there’s always going to be some solution that someone doesn’t like, ultimately leading to no action being taken. I get that this may not be what you want to hear - I am an open source, open standards advocate at heart - but if you want to attract a different crowd and get a different kind of interaction, simply start a Discord server. There are so many vibrant communities out there who can attest to this. Choose anything else and the RIPE Community will miss out on a ton of people who may have something valuable to contribute. My suggestion: keep the mailing lists as is for the people who prefer that, and add Discord to the mix. Be bold. Give it a shot. -Alex
On 26 May 2023, at 09:41, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
Dear RIPE community,
At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here:
- https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115
I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change.
There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
The text below is similar to something I shared with the WG Chairs several months ago.
Kind regards,.
Leo
ripe-781 describes four fundamental principles supporting our policy development process. The first two principles are openness and transparency.
Changes in the treatment of e-mail by large industry players presents a challenge to these two principles.
In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, have made discussion mailing lists less effective.
Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when their e-mail services provider treats them as junk.
When a legitimate message to a RIPE discussion list is treated as junk the sender's voice has been moderated by a third-party mail provider. RIPE's transparency is diminished when its discussion lists are subjected to gatekeeping by third-party mail providers.
In 1992, e-mail was an improvement to postal services and telephony protocols. In 2023, we have a wide choice of communication protocols and platforms.
I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world.
We must offer all current and potential participants in RIPE an effective set of tools. Any tools we use must support the principles of openness and transparency.
An ideal set of tools might have features like this:
1. An open protocol available for implementation by anyone. 2. Free(ly available) software implementations for popular operating systems (Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows). 3. Allows a user to choose to have activity pushed to them. They must not be forced to maintain a login to be informed of activity they are interested in. 4. A public archive that cannot be retrospectively edited (barring exceptional situations).
While the technology choices need to support the principles of openness and transparency, they do not need to do all the work. Announcements, blog posts, and other kinds of communications can be built into our processes.
The combination of technology and process can make the whole more effective.
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
On 26 May 2023, at 13:11, Alex Band <alex@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
Looking at the people who replied to this thread so far, this discussion appears to have all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Gert, Jim, Joe… All people I’ve known for over a decade or more in the RIPE Community, saying on a mailing list that they prefer email. :)
Well, I did say these sorts of discussions end up going in circles. :-)
I'm in the under 35 crowd (for a bit longer, anyway), and I think that's a good way forward! :-) +1 to Discord, +1 to email! Best, -Michael On Sat, May 27, 2023 at 11:43 AM Alex Band <alex@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
Looking at the people who replied to this thread so far, this discussion appears to have all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Gert, Jim, Joe… All people I’ve known for over a decade or more in the RIPE Community, saying on a mailing list that they prefer email. :)
I guess it’s no surprise that none of the younger generation, or people who do not like email (style) communications, are here to say that they prefer something else instead. They’re all on on Discord servers like DisNOG, BGPeople, or the RPKI Community server talking to like-minded people, solving problems and having a good time.
I would really hope we can at least get beyond the point of acknowledging that mailing lists are not for everyone. But even then, we can do a ton of research looking of the holy grail of platforms that is open source, decentralised, publicly archived, freely available, has favourable Terms and Conditions, and what have you. There’s a good chance there’s always going to be some solution that someone doesn’t like, ultimately leading to no action being taken.
I get that this may not be what you want to hear - I am an open source, open standards advocate at heart - but if you want to attract a different crowd and get a different kind of interaction, simply start a Discord server. There are so many vibrant communities out there who can attest to this. Choose anything else and the RIPE Community will miss out on a ton of people who may have something valuable to contribute.
My suggestion: keep the mailing lists as is for the people who prefer that, and add Discord to the mix.
Be bold. Give it a shot.
-Alex
On 26 May 2023, at 09:41, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
Dear RIPE community,
At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here:
- https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115
I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change.
There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
The text below is similar to something I shared with the WG Chairs several months ago.
Kind regards,.
Leo
ripe-781 describes four fundamental principles supporting our policy development process. The first two principles are openness and transparency.
Changes in the treatment of e-mail by large industry players presents a challenge to these two principles.
In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, have made discussion mailing lists less effective.
Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when their e-mail services provider treats them as junk.
When a legitimate message to a RIPE discussion list is treated as junk the sender's voice has been moderated by a third-party mail provider. RIPE's transparency is diminished when its discussion lists are subjected to gatekeeping by third-party mail providers.
In 1992, e-mail was an improvement to postal services and telephony protocols. In 2023, we have a wide choice of communication protocols and platforms.
I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world.
We must offer all current and potential participants in RIPE an effective set of tools. Any tools we use must support the principles of openness and transparency.
An ideal set of tools might have features like this:
1. An open protocol available for implementation by anyone. 2. Free(ly available) software implementations for popular operating systems (Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows). 3. Allows a user to choose to have activity pushed to them. They must not be forced to maintain a login to be informed of activity they are interested in. 4. A public archive that cannot be retrospectively edited (barring exceptional situations).
While the technology choices need to support the principles of openness and transparency, they do not need to do all the work. Announcements, blog posts, and other kinds of communications can be built into our processes.
The combination of technology and process can make the whole more effective.
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
TL;DR: We need a working group. (More at the end.) Dear RIPE Fellows, first of all, I should state, and most of you should have also done the same, that I'm in a conflict of interests. I'm used to a certain style of work which is very compatible with mailing lists. My views on this topic may be skewed. On 5/26/23 14:11, Alex Band wrote:
Looking at the people who replied to this thread so far, this discussion appears to have all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Gert, Jim, Joe… All people I’ve known for over a decade or more in the RIPE Community, saying on a mailing list that they prefer email. :)
I guess it’s no surprise that none of the younger generation, or people who do not like email (style) communications, are here to say that they prefer something else instead. They’re all on on Discord servers like DisNOG, BGPeople, or the RPKI Community server talking to like-minded people, solving problems and having a good time.
I fully agree. The mailing-list is not a statistically valid sample of the community. Before even opening the discussion about how to solve this problem, we should look for a method how to assess different preferences of community members. And this is not a work for us engineers, we seriously need a sociologist to do a valid study with a reasonable methodology. Now, we're telling fortunes from a crystal ball, quietly assuming that it's a better method than tea leaves or a magic wand. We need data.
I would really hope we can at least get beyond the point of acknowledging that mailing lists are not for everyone. But even then, we can do a ton of research looking of the holy grail of platforms that is open source, decentralised, publicly archived, freely available, has favourable Terms and Conditions, and what have you. There’s a good chance there’s always going to be some solution that someone doesn’t like, ultimately leading to no action being taken.
I get that this may not be what you want to hear - I am an open source, open standards advocate at heart - but if you want to attract a different crowd and get a different kind of interaction, simply start a Discord server. There are so many vibrant communities out there who can attest to this. Choose anything else and the RIPE Community will miss out on a ton of people who may have something valuable to contribute.
My suggestion: keep the mailing lists as is for the people who prefer that, and add Discord to the mix.
Be bold. Give it a shot.
By adding a disjoint technology to the mix, we're heading to duplicate discussions and even factions emerging. I'm all for adding Discord (or whatever else), yet there must be a dedicated group of people standing in both, being able to forward thoughts and decisions from one channel to another. There may be also different approaches altogether. We may be missing e.g. some visually impaired or dyslectic people, who often rely more on sound than on text – yet keeping in mind that sound may be on the other hand a showstopper for not only hearing-impaired but also e.g. for lots of ADHD people. I'm not proposing anything specific here, just trying to shed some light on other factors we haven't yet covered. Anyway, I'm having a proposal. We shall spin up a new working group, named e.g. "Community and Diversity", to take care of these affairs, to gather relevant data, to discuss possible solutions, to coordinate the communication-bridge-volunteers mentioned above and also to present the results and to propose solutions based on data analysis. Yet we shall _not_ wait with the Discord or whatever else until the working group gathers data. This way, we're lowering the risk of losing diversity in future. Thank you all for the opportunity to be a part of the RIPE Community. Maria -- Maria Matejka | BIRD Team Leader | CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o.
Hi Alex, I think I can place myself in the category of "young people" and I have to say that I have kinda mixed feelings. I am against migrating away from mailing lists or moving actual policy work elsewhere. I'm especially against moving it to something that's not open source and self-hosted. (self-hosted includes stuff that would be hosted by the NCC here) There's an unofficial RIPE community telegram group which works pretty well for informal chatting. We could create an unofficial RIPE community Discord as well. I don't think it makes a huge difference if it's official or not if it's just informal discussion. I just created a Discord that we can try to use to see how much interest there is. Anyone who's interested please let me know and I will send you an invite. (I don't really know if I should post the invite link on the actual mailing list) -Cynthia On Sat, 27 May 2023, 11:43 Alex Band, <alex@nlnetlabs.nl> wrote:
Looking at the people who replied to this thread so far, this discussion appears to have all the makings of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Gert, Jim, Joe… All people I’ve known for over a decade or more in the RIPE Community, saying on a mailing list that they prefer email. :)
I guess it’s no surprise that none of the younger generation, or people who do not like email (style) communications, are here to say that they prefer something else instead. They’re all on on Discord servers like DisNOG, BGPeople, or the RPKI Community server talking to like-minded people, solving problems and having a good time.
I would really hope we can at least get beyond the point of acknowledging that mailing lists are not for everyone. But even then, we can do a ton of research looking of the holy grail of platforms that is open source, decentralised, publicly archived, freely available, has favourable Terms and Conditions, and what have you. There’s a good chance there’s always going to be some solution that someone doesn’t like, ultimately leading to no action being taken.
I get that this may not be what you want to hear - I am an open source, open standards advocate at heart - but if you want to attract a different crowd and get a different kind of interaction, simply start a Discord server. There are so many vibrant communities out there who can attest to this. Choose anything else and the RIPE Community will miss out on a ton of people who may have something valuable to contribute.
My suggestion: keep the mailing lists as is for the people who prefer that, and add Discord to the mix.
Be bold. Give it a shot.
-Alex
On 26 May 2023, at 09:41, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
Dear RIPE community,
At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here:
- https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115
I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change.
There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
The text below is similar to something I shared with the WG Chairs several months ago.
Kind regards,.
Leo
ripe-781 describes four fundamental principles supporting our policy development process. The first two principles are openness and transparency.
Changes in the treatment of e-mail by large industry players presents a challenge to these two principles.
In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, have made discussion mailing lists less effective.
Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when their e-mail services provider treats them as junk.
When a legitimate message to a RIPE discussion list is treated as junk the sender's voice has been moderated by a third-party mail provider. RIPE's transparency is diminished when its discussion lists are subjected to gatekeeping by third-party mail providers.
In 1992, e-mail was an improvement to postal services and telephony protocols. In 2023, we have a wide choice of communication protocols and platforms.
I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world.
We must offer all current and potential participants in RIPE an effective set of tools. Any tools we use must support the principles of openness and transparency.
An ideal set of tools might have features like this:
1. An open protocol available for implementation by anyone. 2. Free(ly available) software implementations for popular operating systems (Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows). 3. Allows a user to choose to have activity pushed to them. They must not be forced to maintain a login to be informed of activity they are interested in. 4. A public archive that cannot be retrospectively edited (barring exceptional situations).
While the technology choices need to support the principles of openness and transparency, they do not need to do all the work. Announcements, blog posts, and other kinds of communications can be built into our processes.
The combination of technology and process can make the whole more effective.
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
Am 26.05.23 um 14:11 schrieb Alex Band:
I guess it’s no surprise that none of the younger generation, or people who do not like email (style) communications, are here to say that they prefer something else instead. They’re all on on Discord servers like DisNOG, BGPeople, or the RPKI Community server talking to like-minded people, solving problems and having a good time.
Discord is the worst solution as it is a closed platform which can't be accessed without an account and is not searchable. I can use google to search through mailing list archives within a second. Discord is a dark net – where no search machine can ever find any content.
I would really hope we can at least get beyond the point of acknowledging that mailing lists are not for everyone. But even then, we can do a ton of research looking of the holy grail of platforms that is open source, decentralised, publicly archived, freely available, has favourable Terms and Conditions, and what have you. There’s a good chance there’s always going to be some solution that someone doesn’t like, ultimately leading to no action being taken.
Matrix exists. It has an easy interface, many clients for all the platforms out there and be self hosted. There is simply no need for a closed platform.
My suggestion: keep the mailing lists as is for the people who prefer that, and add Discord to the mix.
My suggestion: Keep the mailing lists as is and add a selft hosted Matrix server. All the Matrix content could then be easily exported into a search machine.
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 09:41:59AM +0200, Leo Vegoda wrote:
Dear RIPE community,
At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here:
- https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115
I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change.
There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
Hello The main advantage of e-mail is that it is that it is an acceptable technology for everybody. Alternative approaches (to keeping just mailing lists) are: 1) Select one alternative as the only replacement It is unlikely that we would agree on one good alternative. It could drive out dissenters, as many alternatives are unacceptable for some people for several reasons: - some are proprietary instead of open (e.g. Discord, Slack) - some are silos (keep all state on central server) - some have just web / Electron clients instead of well-defined application protocol and collection of clients. 2) Offer multiple alternatives that are not connected Some open-source projects do that, but it leads to fragmentation of community, where instead of one group of people there are multiple groups of people around each technology. 3) Offer multiple alternatives connected by bridges Not sure how much realistic this is. Although i heard Qt project is going this way. -- Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santiago@crfreenet.org) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote: > - Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication > channel for the foreseeable future? Yes. > - Are e-mail discussion lists an > acceptable technology to people joining the industry? It's true that I observe that my 18yr old doesn't do much email. But historically, few of them ever did. We used to teach how to do email back in the 1980s as "Internet 101", and I think we need to redo that material. > In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services > on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more > difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, > have made discussion mailing lists less effective. We, as a community, need to make some strategic investments in (DM)ARC support. Mailman3, which the IETF will shortly move to, is better than mailman2, but... it also is way more complex to maintain. I still can't get my installation to archive properly. > Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated > as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when > their e-mail services provider treats them as junk. The IETF will have to, I think, start offering an IMAP/mailbox service to many participants because for many, nothing else is working. I think that it would be more difficult for RIPE to do that, but it's something to think about. Ideally, there would be a standard (BCP/BCOP) on useful email services, and there would be multiple providers who agree to work with us. It would be nice if abuse@ boxes could operate in a consistent way, if email reports from one ISP to another could more easily be authenticated, for instance. > I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by > potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want > these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination > for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world. I don't really buy this argument. Yeah, I prefer ice cream for dinner too. The problem isn't that young people prefer things other than email, it's that they have yet to ever actually use properly configured email, and have grown up with webmail *ONLY*, and then they get to work, and they also don't get email, but gateways LOOKOUT, which also doesn't work right. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
On 5/26/23 21:07, Michael Richardson wrote:
Leo Vegoda<leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
> Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated > as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when > their e-mail services provider treats them as junk.
The IETF will have to, I think, start offering an IMAP/mailbox service to many participants because for many, nothing else is working. I think that it would be more difficult for RIPE to do that, but it's something to think about. Ideally, there would be a standard (BCP/BCOP) on useful email services, and there would be multiple providers who agree to work with us.
It would be nice if we could have a kind-of-freemail for these participants who don't like using e-mail. And if it had an automatic transport to e.g. Discord or Telegram… … yes, somebody has to code it, I know. Yet it may be worth it. -- Maria Matejka | BIRD Team Leader | CZ.NIC, z.s.p.o.
If you want to kill it (internet - or any coordination on it ) asap - it will be the best way - simply to refuse from email and discussion lists. Don't want t waste time on arguments - sorry... Dima On 5/26/23 10:41 AM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
Dear RIPE community,
At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here:
- https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115
I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change.
There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
The text below is similar to something I shared with the WG Chairs several months ago.
Kind regards,.
Leo
ripe-781 describes four fundamental principles supporting our policy development process. The first two principles are openness and transparency.
Changes in the treatment of e-mail by large industry players presents a challenge to these two principles.
In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, have made discussion mailing lists less effective.
Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when their e-mail services provider treats them as junk.
When a legitimate message to a RIPE discussion list is treated as junk the sender's voice has been moderated by a third-party mail provider. RIPE's transparency is diminished when its discussion lists are subjected to gatekeeping by third-party mail providers.
In 1992, e-mail was an improvement to postal services and telephony protocols. In 2023, we have a wide choice of communication protocols and platforms.
I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world.
We must offer all current and potential participants in RIPE an effective set of tools. Any tools we use must support the principles of openness and transparency.
An ideal set of tools might have features like this:
1. An open protocol available for implementation by anyone. 2. Free(ly available) software implementations for popular operating systems (Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows). 3. Allows a user to choose to have activity pushed to them. They must not be forced to maintain a login to be informed of activity they are interested in. 4. A public archive that cannot be retrospectively edited (barring exceptional situations).
While the technology choices need to support the principles of openness and transparency, they do not need to do all the work. Announcements, blog posts, and other kinds of communications can be built into our processes.
The combination of technology and process can make the whole more effective.
Hi Leo, all,
On 26 May 2023, at 09:41, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
I think that mailing lists are still needed for high volume lists, and I think they are better suited for formal processes, especially regarding consensus assessment. They are also archived, which helps this. That said, as a community we already have various other official-to-less-official means of communication. We have in person RIPE meetings, WG sessions, hallway chats, direct email or calls between people, and various IRC and discord channels where people hang out. Zooming in on discord.. Based on my experience in an RPKI discord server.. I think it's a valuable addition to mailing lists. It has a low barrier to entry (mac/windows/linux/web). It's especially suited for interactive discussions. It's easy to set up topic-specific side channels. It's really easy to set up ad-hoc one-on-one or group discussions. Also with people you did not know before. This can help to get to the bottom of things quickly, and it can help clear misunderstandings. Being interactive it also tends to be friendlier than mailing lists can sometimes be - it's easy to read the wrong emotion in an email and escalate - this can happen in chat, but as far as I have seen the opposite holds true most of the time. In short.. I think chat (at least discord) adds something else that we cannot get from email. Email has features that chat can't give. I re-watched the presentation and discussion and I heard several people make similar statements: chat does not need to be a *replacement* for the mailing lists. It's not necessarily "either-or". Echoing a bit of what Randy said earlier - yes there could be a scaling issue. A high volume and/or moderated-by-necessity list may not be best suited for this. But.. I think that for some working groups this may work very well - e.g. if routing or open-source offered an official discord server, then I would join in a heartbeat. I would say.. just start small! It would be great if working group chairs would be in the chat as well, but again based on my RPKI server experience it's also fine if enough people are on both the chat and the (official) mailing list. They can act as bridges between these worlds. Tim
Hi all, Just my 2c. If there was a discord, IRC, Telegram, whatever chat solution, I would not take part in it (and not consider it to contain official information), because of the lack of archiving and search capabilities. Email has as well many technical advantages, like being independent from a certain client software, as example. This is what makes email for me the most versatile option. BR, Peter -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 12:21, Peter Stimpel <[peter@yellowfox.net](mailto:On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 12:21, Peter Stimpel <<a href=)> wrote:
Just my 2c. If there was a discord, IRC, Telegram, whatever chat solution, I would not take part in it (and not consider it to contain official information), because of the lack of archiving and search capabilities.
An archive is not of much practical use if there is nothing to archive. This conversation feels like an exception rather than any kind of rule. These lists rarely contain anything more than announcements. Joe
[...] They are also archived, which helps this.
Tim Bruijnzeels wrote on 28/05/2023 18:54: the more fundamental issue here is whether the content should be self-hosted or hosted using a third party content hosting system. I.e. if the third party becomes unworkable or disappears entirely, what happens the content? Nick
Hi Nick, all,
On 29 May 2023, at 12:56, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
[...] They are also archived, which helps this.
Tim Bruijnzeels wrote on 28/05/2023 18:54: the more fundamental issue here is whether the content should be self-hosted or hosted using a third party content hosting system. I.e. if the third party becomes unworkable or disappears entirely, what happens the content?
If you want to go self-hosted then Mattermost may be worth considering. There are of course also other solutions. My main point was though that I would love to have an official, yet informal, modern chat option with discord/mattermost like features in *addition* to the mailing list (which I do not want to replace). Chat serves a different purpose. An official (yet informal) instance would go a long way to encourage quick discussions between people that otherwise would not meet. Lacking this, people will just self-organise like they do today (IRC, telegram, their own discord etc). The downside of this is that there will be less interaction between them as they gravitate into their own groups. Tim
Nick
there is no 'solution' to this 'problem,' partly because we have not formulated it very well. is it how we discuss policy and politics? how we debug code? how we measure BGP and DNS? ... just as people have different learning modes: lectures, reading, videos, audio books, ... we also have communication media biases. and this is compounded by function. policy discussions are rather different than debugging. though i confess that forcing myself to describe the bug thoroughly in an email often reveals the solution while slack does not. and let's try not to be ageist. o as edward said, we have people entering the field mid-life as a second career. o i can not speak for the set of young, newcomers, etc. as i am not in those sets. speaking for others is akin to vendors saying "customers are not asking for IPv6." o others can and should be encouraged to speak for themselves. speaking for them is patronizing at best. we have mailing lists which are formal in the sense of being hosted and sanctioned by wgs and the ncc. we have ad hoc irc. i assume we have folk donating their text to discord's IP lawyers. what are the success stories? randy
[...] They are also archived, which helps this.
There are those of us that live in distant timezones, where a real-time comms/chatting tool would be of minimal value, and might have the effect of removing us from the conversation. I think you may also find that those tools may not be available or accessible in secured work environments such as the one I am in. When I look back over the last few years, I am also concerned about moderation in such an environment. Things can move very quickly in a real-time chat environment. I am for moving forward, I just ask that we ensure that it is in a controlled and inclusive fashion. Jim NTAC:3NS-20 -----Original Message----- From: ripe-list <ripe-list-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: Monday, May 29, 2023 5:57 AM To: Tim Bruijnzeels <tim@nlnetlabs.nl> Cc: ripe-list@ripe.net Subject: [EXT] Re: [ripe-list] The Future of Discussion Lists This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you have verified this email is legitimate. Tim Bruijnzeels wrote on 28/05/2023 18:54: the more fundamental issue here is whether the content should be self-hosted or hosted using a third party content hosting system. I.e. if the third party becomes unworkable or disappears entirely, what happens the content? Nick -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
On Tue, 2023-05-30 at 12:21 +0000, Jim Brand wrote:
There are those of us that live in distant timezones, where a real- time comms/chatting tool would be of minimal value, and might have the effect of removing us from the conversation. I think you may also find that those tools may not be available or accessible in secured work environments such as the one I am in.
I am only half joking when I say that this is just screaming for the reinvention of Usenet: open, distributed, low barrier, can interface to various other media (e.g. email)... Yes, there are flaws wrt. moderation and (sender) verification, but with some federated authentication and careful feed distribution, I think this can actually work. Cheers, Steven
Morning, all. When I attended my first RIPE in 1998, the idea that you could do policy coordination on _the internet_, especially on an open list that uncredentialled people could just join, was pretty radical. It's not radical anymore. Well done, us. Leo's right, and the problems he identifies are real. Reading this thread, most of what I see are "minimum requirements". Implicit in this seems to be the idea that Important People Won't Join if those requirements aren't met. What I don't see so much yet is a picture of what a new, radical, open approach could look like. Which is the thing that made RIPE successful in the first place. All the best, Anna p.s. Some mistakes will definitely be made. That's good? That means some decisions are being made. -- Anna Wilson, Technical Architect [I am sending this email at a time that suits me, and I encourage you to respond at a time that suits you.] HEAnet CLG, Ireland’s National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George’s Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +353 (0)1 6609040 anna.wilson@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
How close are we to reinventing NNTP ? Only half-joking :-) via Newton Mail <https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=pi&cv=10.0.62&pv=16.4.1&source=email_footer_2> On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 6:43, Anna Wilson <anna.wilson@heanet.ie> wrote: Morning, all. When I attended my first RIPE in 1998, the idea that you could do policy coordination on _the internet_, especially on an open list that uncredentialled people could just join, was pretty radical. It's not radical anymore. Well done, us. Leo's right, and the problems he identifies are real. Reading this thread, most of what I see are "minimum requirements". Implicit in this seems to be the idea that Important People Won't Join if those requirements aren't met. What I don't see so much yet is a picture of what a new, radical, open approach could look like. Which is the thing that made RIPE successful in the first place. All the best, Anna p.s. Some mistakes will definitely be made. That's good? That means some decisions are being made. -- Anna Wilson, Technical Architect [I am sending this email at a time that suits me, and I encourage you to respond at a time that suits you.] HEAnet CLG, Ireland’s National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George’s Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +353 (0)1 6609040 anna.wilson@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
[Please view this message as either plain text or HTML, according to your preference and the capabilities of the application you use to read mail] On 29 May 2023, at 10:43, Anna Wilson wrote:
When I attended my first RIPE in 1998, the idea that you could do policy coordination on _the internet_, especially on an open list that uncredentialled people could just join, was pretty radical.
Re "uncredentialled", see below ...
It's not radical anymore. Well done, us.
Leo's right, and the problems he identifies are real.
Yes, and Leo's not the only one.
Reading this thread, most of what I see are "minimum requirements". Implicit in this seems to be the idea that Important People Won't Join if those requirements aren't met.
What I don't see so much yet is a picture of what a new, radical, open approach could look like. Which is the thing that made RIPE successful in the first place.
I don't have that picture yet. I can offer some brainstorming bullet-points which I've assembled from - things I (thought I) understood from Leo well before RIPE86, - what I've seen while lurking in the hallway-chat channel of the RPKI Community Discord server, - what I've noticed in this thread, - various hallway conversations, - some concerns of my own. I hope these will help towards painting a clearer picture. I'm sure I've inadvertently left some things, perhaps even important ones, out, and equally sure that one or other of you will help fill in the gaps. ## Disclaimer No personal name used below, except that of the author, is intended to refer to any actual person, living or dead. ## Preconceptions Alternatively "prejudices", or "how things used to be". - open standards (SMTP, MIME) ensured interoperability - in-house service, not commodity at scale, and consequently: * local expert(s) with responsibility for operating server; * direct relationship between user and operator; * email address was quasi-credential; eg. Niall.oReilly@ucd.ie identified the sender because the local operator (probably Niall O'Reilly himself or a very close colleague) had to set up the mailbox; * direct resolution of almost all problems; * typically only two, or maybe three, parties involved: local server operator at ucd.ie, heanet.ie, and maybe list admin at ripe.net. ## Meanwhile "It's email, Jim, but not as we (used to) know it." - outsourced service, badge-engineered with domain-part of address; - proprietary "enhancements" undermine interoperability; - different aspects of service outsourced separately, perhaps indirectly: * mailbox hosting, * blocklists; - indirect problem resolution via (chain of) outsourced providers; - restricted range of problems which any given provider will address; - message transmission may be restricted by a provider's policies; - complexity due to richer set of standards (SPF, DKIM, SAML, OAuth, TLS). ## Use cases - targeted/personal notification: * unique personal link to meeting platform, * access credential for e-voting system, * invoices, receipts; - group communication: * informal or ephemeral chat; * on-the-record discussion; * formal announcement of milestone or other state transition, eg: - phase of discussion, - consensus, - beginning or end of term of office; ## Strengths of e-mail - single client (MUA) gives user access to, and management of, many message feeds; - variety of MUAs matching personal preference and workflow: * web-based, * editor-based, * dedicated application; - list archives * support transparency, * provide backup for inadvertently deleted messages, * mitigate effect of non-delivery; - mature technology (but see below). ## Weaknesses of e-mail - mature technology (but see above); - some (even many) people find alternative platforms better for informal, ephemeral, or more dynamic interaction; - selective delivery, according to provider's policy. ## Challenges - RIPE (and/or RIPE NCC) "branding"; - applicability of RIPE Code of Conduct to alternative means of communication; - proprietary vs open-source platform; - in-house or outsourced operation; - selection of user application (UA): * risk of proliferation of UA applications, * aggregating UA apps (eg Mattermost); - tapered (rather than abrupt) transition; - parallel support for alternative delivery channels; --- I hope this helps. Niall
Leo It’s an interesting question. Years ago I used to use mailing lists and email much more heavily, but over time I’ve found it less and less useful. A “busy” discussion topic can generate a huge volume of emails, though how much of that is “of value” vs how much is “noise” is hard to judge, but what’s pretty clear to me personally is that I don’t have the time to read hundreds of emails to try and get to whatever might be of value in there. Using other tools to “discuss” things makes a lot of sense, however I don’t think that it’s as simple as “replacing” one tool with another. As others have pointed out email lists are good because they’re asynchronous and have archives. But there’s nothing wrong with trying other tools like Slack / Discord / $thing to “discuss” an issue / policy / $topic Are younger members of the RIPE community using the forum and other tools? Regards Michele -- Mr Michele Neylon Blacknight Solutions Hosting, Colocation & Domains https://www.blacknight.com/ https://blacknight.blog/ Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072 Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090 Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ ------------------------------- Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland Company No.: 370845 I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours. From: ripe-list <ripe-list-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> Date: Friday, 26 May 2023 at 09:07 To: ripe-list@ripe.net <ripe-list@ripe.net> Subject: [ripe-list] The Future of Discussion Lists [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources. Dear RIPE community, At yesterday’s community plenary I asked whether mailing lists are sustainable as our main communication channel. For those who were not able to attend, the slide and a recording are available here: - https://ripe86.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/12-Mailing-Lists-RI... - https://ripe86.ripe.net/archives/video/1115 I am obviously concerned that discussion lists might not serve us with fidelity in the future. If that is the case, I want us to manage any change we need to make. We should not be bounced into rapid change. There was more discussion than I expected. I’m sending this message to ask the questions: - Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry? The text below is similar to something I shared with the WG Chairs several months ago. Kind regards,. Leo ripe-781 describes four fundamental principles supporting our policy development process. The first two principles are openness and transparency. Changes in the treatment of e-mail by large industry players presents a challenge to these two principles. In 1992, when ripe-001 was published, anyone could run e-mail services on any Internet infrastructure they could use. It is now far more difficult to run e-mail services. Technology developments, like DMARC, have made discussion mailing lists less effective. Validation failures increase the probability of messages being treated as junk. Subscribers to RIPE's discussion lists will miss messages when their e-mail services provider treats them as junk. When a legitimate message to a RIPE discussion list is treated as junk the sender's voice has been moderated by a third-party mail provider. RIPE's transparency is diminished when its discussion lists are subjected to gatekeeping by third-party mail providers. In 1992, e-mail was an improvement to postal services and telephony protocols. In 2023, we have a wide choice of communication protocols and platforms. I believe that new protocols and platforms are preferred over e-mail by potential participants in RIPE at the start of their careers. We want these people to take part in RIPE. They are the future of coordination for the operators of IP networks in Europe and the rest of the world. We must offer all current and potential participants in RIPE an effective set of tools. Any tools we use must support the principles of openness and transparency. An ideal set of tools might have features like this: 1. An open protocol available for implementation by anyone. 2. Free(ly available) software implementations for popular operating systems (Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows). 3. Allows a user to choose to have activity pushed to them. They must not be forced to maintain a login to be informed of activity they are interested in. 4. A public archive that cannot be retrospectively edited (barring exceptional situations). While the technology choices need to support the principles of openness and transparency, they do not need to do all the work. Announcements, blog posts, and other kinds of communications can be built into our processes. The combination of technology and process can make the whole more effective. -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-list
On 5/26/23 9:41 AM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
hi, Is the use of e-mail really a barrier to entry for newcomers in the Internet industry? Or is it just yet another attempt to simplify what is in fact already simple? I distinctly remember a presentation during RIPE86 about training tools suitable for the younger generation. One of the arguments discussed was about access to RFCs, that is, whether or not to have students read them. Opinions were, and I imagine still are, divided. In other words, is it necessary to dismantle a black-and-white, classic tool that all in all does its job (albeit with some flaws) for a color one that is very fashionable? Wouldn't it be more feasible instead to solve any problems that are encountered with mailing lists today? These are obviously open questions that, as Leo suggests, require long-term thinking so that we do not run the risk of saying or doing something rash. In this regard, it might be helpful to have the usage statistics of the young Discourse server? (https://forum.ripe.net/) Perhaps we can draw further discussion from them. -- antonio
Dear Antonio, Thanks for asking about the RIPE NCC Forum stats. It’s been seven months since we launched it and it’s a good time to check in on it with stats and an overview on how I think it’s been going. The numbers: - 59 topics started - 255 posts in total - 18,500 views of those posts - 294 subscribers I like being able to see stats on topic views - it gives an indication of what people are interested in. With email, we have no insight into that sort of thing. The system tells me there are over 200,000 pageviews since we launched, although this is mainly people viewing the home page rather than going into topics. And people can view all posts without being a subscriber, which a lot of people seem to do. You just need to subscribe to join a discussion and see stats on the home page. The overview: The forum started slowly but is developing pretty much in line with how Discourse tells us new forums should progress. It takes time but when there are interesting topics posted you’ll see a gradual increase in the number of users and people posting. The range of topics posted is very good. They run from big existential questions to posts about meeting up socially at RIPE Meetings. There are a fair few posts from people trying to debug or solve issues in the RIPE Database or with RIPE Atlas. And quite a few posts use images, so we can post nice visualisations that can start a discussion, and people have provided screenshots of code they’re having trouble with. The main thing for me is that they all sit quite comfortably together. The active topics float to the top, old topics can be reactivated easily, and you don’t really have to figure out what to post and where - just add anything you want to start a discussion on or ask a question about and that’s it. When I look at the main page, I get a sense of a pretty vibrant community talking about lots of interesting things or coming together to solve problems. And it’s very easy to share posts to other channels. And I’ve seen a lot of people either post or subscribe that I don’t see on the mailing lists. The nice thing is that I also see a lot of people who are regular posters on the mailing lists. I think that’s a good development. And you will see a lot of our staff getting involved there, helping out people who have problems or just joining discussions. I think it’s good for the community and for our staff to have those regular interactions, especially with the staff who are running our technical services. Partly, I believe the forum is well suited for staff to post less developed or completed pieces of work, which lowers the threshold for posting. We’ve put up some visualisations of work we’re doing that are at the development stage, but they can spark ideas or conversations that can help us with that work and guide what we’re doing. A good example is this post, where one of our staff posted some work at an early stage, people asked for more information, and it led to people taking action in their own communities to push IPv6 deployment: https://forum.ripe.net/t/dataviz-ipv6-capability-in-greece/363/9 We also don’t use it to make announcements from the RIPE NCC, which keeps it focused on discussions and helping to solve people’s problems. Eventually, I would hope by solving problems there, we can have a nice searchable resource for others who encounter similar problems that need solving. Given the mail is running long, here’s a few other things I like about it: - Discourse is open source, it’s low cost, it’s easy to maintain and easy to use - It’s good for synchronous and asynchronous discussions - it depends how you set up your preferences - It has a lot of features (like closed groups for discrete purposes or groups, chat functionality, etc.) that we could think about using - Moderation is much easier than I expected - the system holds mails for human checks if there are doubts, but regular posters have their posts put through straight away - People wanting to chat in other languages can do so - Categorisation and tagging let’s people find specific issues - People can choose to get emails on all posts or specific ones they are interested in - You can post to the forum using email - Adding visualisations to posts is something I think adds a lot of value - There is an informality about posting on the forum that I think makes it quite fun to get engaged with (every community needs at least a little fun) In short, I like it a lot as an administrator and a user. But in the end, it will only be successful if other people use it too. With that in mind, I’d urge you to sign up, try out the features and see what you think. There are already a couple of posts (“What do you think of the new forum?” and a post linking to Leo’s original mail on this topic) that might be good places to start, but probably better is to start a topic on something you find interesting and just see what happens. We still plan to do a proper review at the end of the year as promised when we launched it, but of course that review will be better if we have some good input from people using it. Thanks for reading (if you made it this far :)), Fergal On 30/05/2023 16:02, Antonio Prado via ripe-list wrote:
On 5/26/23 9:41 AM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
- Am I wrong? Are e-mail discussion lists a sustainable communication channel for the foreseeable future? - Are e-mail discussion lists an acceptable technology to people joining the industry?
hi,
Is the use of e-mail really a barrier to entry for newcomers in the Internet industry? Or is it just yet another attempt to simplify what is in fact already simple?
I distinctly remember a presentation during RIPE86 about training tools suitable for the younger generation. One of the arguments discussed was about access to RFCs, that is, whether or not to have students read them. Opinions were, and I imagine still are, divided.
In other words, is it necessary to dismantle a black-and-white, classic tool that all in all does its job (albeit with some flaws) for a color one that is very fashionable?
Wouldn't it be more feasible instead to solve any problems that are encountered with mailing lists today?
These are obviously open questions that, as Leo suggests, require long-term thinking so that we do not run the risk of saying or doing something rash.
In this regard, it might be helpful to have the usage statistics of the young Discourse server? (https://forum.ripe.net/)
Perhaps we can draw further discussion from them. -- antonio
On 6/8/23 4:02 PM, Fergal Cunningham wrote:
Thanks for asking about the RIPE NCC Forum stats. It’s been seven months since we launched it and it’s a good time to check in on it with stats and an overview on how I think it’s been going.
The numbers: - 59 topics started - 255 posts in total - 18,500 views of those posts - 294 subscribers
hi Fergal, thanks for your useful insights. what I personally like about Discourse is that I can deal with it as a mailing-list while others use it as an on-line forum. Both means interoperate well for me. basically two tools that have different paradigms of operation manage to work together very well, leaving me the freedom to use my e-mail client and others the ability to go to the www for a "more colorful" experience. the ability to search archives is already there and is guaranteed, over time, by the fact that it is open source software that is managed and maintained in-house. -- antonio
Hi all, This is not a post against systems like Discord, just a cautionary warning about... _Discord_. I tried to create a work account over a year ago to join the RPKI server... a year ago... I now have two locked, unusable, work accounts! And somehow tied my phone number to a non-existing accidental account that I have no way to access to remove the number. I've been in contact with Discord support multiple times over the year without any real help or fix. Most of the time they don't even respond. I tried again when this thread spun up and last week I got noticed that my issue might be escalated, but I dare not ask how it's going because they have a weird policy that if you email into an issue it will be put last in the queue. I hope to one day be able to join the RPKI server on a work account :) Cheers, Jerry
participants (29)
-
Alex Band -
Anna Wilson -
Antonio Prado -
Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo -
Carsten Schiefner -
Cynthia Revström -
Dmitry Burkov -
Fergal Cunningham -
Gert Doering -
Jerry Lundström -
Jim Brand -
Jim Reid -
Job Snijders -
Joe Abley -
Kai Bojens -
Leo Vegoda -
Maria Matejka -
Michael J. Oghia -
Michael Richardson -
Michele Neylon - Blacknight -
Niall O'Reilly -
Nick Hilliard -
Ondrej Zajicek -
Peter Stimpel -
Randy Bush -
Robert Story -
Sebastian-Becker＠telekom.de -
Steven Bakker -
Tim Bruijnzeels