http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/884 Yeah :-( "Learn the difference between forwarder and forwarders" is not exciting enough for the SPF main page. I reverted three edited pages, hiding News/2008-07-17 as "#PRIVATE". Apologies for this unscheduled exercise, Frank Frank Ellermann 2008-08-01T23:06:18 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/883 It actually means that the grace period for "traditional forwarders" ended after four years. I have now created a 'news' entry, clearly stating that backscatter is spam. Frank Frank Ellermann 2008-08-01T22:08:28 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/882 Sounds reasonable as 'news'. Dunno about spf-announce. It was never an official part of the project, so that seems overkill. Scott K Scott Kitterman 2008-08-01T17:55:08 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/881 Oops. I propose to send that info to SPF ANNOUNCE, and put it on the main page as "news". Frank Frank Ellermann 2008-08-01T17:37:36 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/880 Please check out <http://www.openspf.org/RFC_4408/Errata>, the edit history claims "consensus that impossible labels are no TempError": | Be aware that if the domain owner uses macros (Section 8), it is possible | that this result is due to the checked identities having an unexpected | format. | | Please note that an unexpected <target-name> can be also handled as no match, | ideally implementations document how they handle such issues. The outcome | for an unexpected <domain-spec> before macro expansion might differ from the | outcome for an unexpected <target-name> after macro expansion. Frank Frank Ellermann 2008-04-14T05:41:32 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/879 For info, I've added links to <http://www.ietf.org/NOTEWELL.html> and <https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/nwg_list.cgi> on the <http://www.openspf.org/Forums> page next to the "SPF Discuss" entry, replacing the old "high traffic" indication. Frank Frank Ellermann 2008-03-20T14:31:15 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/878 Mind that Koen has indicated (to me) that he's not able to spend much time (if at all) to make changes. This probably means it would require wget and some scripting from your end. As I promised earlier I will send a message to spf-help and spf-discuss later this night. A week is too long IMHO. And this doesn't address the other problems: * duplicate tickets (question also asked on spf-help) * "I demand YOU fix YOUR problem right NOW" type of messages * i bought a fridg bat it dousnt work i want to return it I'm sure it wasn't a fridge. I'm not sure about what it was. But it doesn't really matter, you got the picture. cheers, Alex ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/ Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77714062-d8e3cf Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com Alex van den Bogaerdt 2007-12-19T19:31:14 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/877 If it's not too much trouble to keep the free ticket page going, it could have a disclaimer about being short on volunteers and a link to your paid ticket page. This would be reasonably friendly with some indication of queue length on the free page. Just an idea. Without *some* volunteers the free page is useless. Another idea. Instead of Alex reminding us about ridiculous queue lengths, an automatic email when queue gets long, sent once per week. Frankly, I get busy and forget to check RT. I would have a few minutes to weed spam at least. That doesn't require much thought. Stuart D. Gathman 2007-12-19T18:05:19 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/876 Correct. Bad wording on my end. Also note that this does not necessarily mean there needs to be a link to a replacement. On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 02:26:24AM +0100, Frank Ellermann wrote: This wouldn't be fair to those who did try and help. Their efforts are appreciated. But somehow they lost interest in a couple of weeks maybe months. If one of them, some of them, all of them, want to take over then that's fine with me. By all means do continue the current way, but please do check in every few days. If not, then keeping RT active is no option and the link has to go. Otherwise people will be disappointed. OK, the details again. What I am suggesting is to modify the form on http://www.openspf.org/Contact and no longer accept tickets "support request" and maybe also "other". Instead, explain very briefly entirely free support has ceased and is replaced by nearly free support. Maybe point the user to /Forums again, although I will do so as well. I suggest a new level 3 header "technical support" fo Alex van den Bogaerdt 2007-12-19T09:49:57 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/875 There will still be free support. Just not a free RT ticket system. Free support requires volunteers, and if the volunteers aren't available, it is kind of like socialized health care (free if you can get it). I am a volunteer - but only sporadically have time to weed the backlog. And you are correct, it is mostly spam. A paypal link would certainly weed out the spam, or at least make it worth your while :-) Stuart D. Gathman 2007-12-19T05:04:35 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/874 Yes, you asked more than once for new volunteers, and nobody did. Sparing you the reasons why *I* didn't, but I certainly saw your requests, and we also discussed the issue on IRC some months ago. Good, then go for it. Maybe you need an okay from Koen, and the Council can "officially" support your plan to some degree wrt the openspf site - if you want a Paypal link on a new page below "Alex" it's actually Julian who might know how to arrange this. If it doesn't work directly with "thingy". E.g. I've never used my earbone shell account, and my svn + earbone passwords are on a harddisk I can't read "at the moment" - I desperately try to delay the point in time when I might be forced to say "never" :-| ["Alex" subpage with Paypal or similar] Nobody can produce a new volunteer out of thin air, e.g. Steve (a regular on the "SPF help" list) should have also seen your repeated requests. So "change is going to happen" even without a decision, simply because you say that you have enough of the "old Frank Ellermann 2007-12-19T01:26:24 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/873 Correct. Correct, and yes, mostly. These are the details I was talking about. Those should be discussed once it is decided to make a change at all. I want to stress that it's perfectly OK with me if the "old way" continues, but in that case you will have to find another volunteer who will take tickets. I was away for some time and nobody else picked up new tickets, resulting in quite a backlog. I need less tickets, and of a higher quality. I think I can achieve that, at least enough, with my proposal. This is completely in line with what I was thinking about. However, this is also a detail to be discussed (if necessary) after deciding change is going to happen at all. As far as I'm concerned, it is the council making the decision to alter the significant part of the project (free undisclosed tickets) and I, Koen (maybe), whoever, will do the rest. I don't think so. Or I don't see it right now. Alex ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943 Alex van den Bogaerdt 2007-12-19T00:14:19 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/872 I'm starting to see the wisdom of IETF other. Can we register ourselves as IETF other right now and then point the auth results people at spf-discuss as another place they need to visit? Scott K ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/ Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77431682-dbf1dc Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com Scott Kitterman 2007-12-19T00:05:31 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/871 Frank Ellermann will learn how to use whatever passes as "IMAP" between OE and Gmail, sorry :-( ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/ Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77416138-f1e246 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com Frank Ellermann 2007-12-18T23:30:14 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/870 SPF help is free for anybody (managing to subscribe to it, or to find a subscribed "posting allowed" account, e.g. on GMane). What you're talking about is the ticket system, and from what you wrote I conclude that it's in essence down to one person (you) answering tickets. As far as I'm concerned you need about "3 out of 5" votes for your proposal - ideally after posting the proposal on the SPF discuss list for review by the community. If you say it's a conflict of interests make it "3 out of 4", with Stuart as a tentative first. [[JFTR, I did this kind of arithmetic before moving a "4 out of 5" erratum to confirmed. And I'm still waiting for the critical 3rd vote on two other issues, Authentication-Results and the "IETF other lists".]] IMHO: At some point the discussion should be continued on the list for discussions - taking silence as "decide what you like" is okay for me, I like to do what I like, but not necessarily with some "hat on" ;-) IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell an Frank Ellermann 2007-12-18T23:17:32 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/869 SPF help is free for anybody (managing to subscribe to it, or to find a subscribed "posting allowed" account, e.g. on GMane). What you're talking about is the ticket system, and from what you wrote I conclude that it's in essence down to one person (you) answering tickets. As far as I'm concerned you need about "3 out of 5" votes for your proposal - ideally after posting the proposal on the SPF discuss list for review by the community. If you say it's a conflict of interests make it "3 out of 4", with Stuart as a tentative first. [[JFTR, I did this kind of arithmetic before moving a "4 out of 5" erratum to confirmed. And I'm still waiting for the critical 3rd vote on two other issues, Authentication-Results and the "IETF other lists".]] IMHO: At some point the discussion should be continued on the list for discussions - taking silence as "decide what you like" is okay for me, I like to do what I like, but not necessarily with some "hat on" ;-) IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell an Frank Ellermann 2007-12-18T23:17:33 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/868 SPF help is free for anybody (managing to subscribe to it, or to find a subscribed "posting allowed" account, e.g. on GMane). What you're talking about is the ticket system, and from what you wrote I conclude that it's in essence down to one person (you) answering tickets. As far as I'm concerned you need about "3 out of 5" votes for your proposal - ideally after posting the proposal on the SPF discuss list for review by the community. If you say it's a conflict of interests make it "3 out of 4", with Stuart as a tentative first. [[JFTR, I did this kind of arithmetic before moving a "4 out of 5" erratum to confirmed. And I'm still waiting for the critical 3rd vote on two other issues, Authentication-Results and the "IETF other lists".]] IMHO: At some point the discussion should be continued on the list for discussions - taking silence as "decide what you like" is okay for me, I like to do what I like, but not necessarily with some "hat on" ;-) IMHO: The openspf site shouldn't *directly* sell an Frank Ellermann 2007-12-18T23:17:27 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/867 Of course. But this is not the main issue. More important is the decision to move away (or not!) from free support. That's why I think a council meeting is in order, one I will not attent as a council member due to possible conflict of interest. Things to discuss (IMHO) are: * making this change yes or no * if no: how to ensure a timely response to those seeking help * if yes: fine details: how much influence should the council have, are you willing to give this all out to just one volunteer regards Alex ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1943/=now RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1943/ Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959930&id_secret=77346202-730ec9 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com Alex van den Bogaerdt 2007-12-18T12:18:20 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/866 Sounds good to me. Better have paypal or something. No one can be bothered to pay a small invoice. Stuart D. Gathman 2007-12-18T04:27:40 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/865 Hi, Not much has happened in the past months but now a change will happen one way or the other. As you are probably well aware, the volunteer team is often not much more than just me myself and I. And I am going to quit as well. I think the council should decide how to continue with support, but of course I will not participate as a council member in that discussion. There are too much posts to the RT system which fall in one or more of the following categories: * a duplicate of a post to spf-help * a disgruntled person wishing to vent his/her anger * a lazy person which just copies the message and demands an explanation * spam Sorry, but I cannot cope with this anymore. I see three possible scenarios: 1: forget about RT (or alike) and let people post to spf-help 2: continue with RT (or alike) but with different people. If this is the way to go, ensure that a backlog of +2weeks does not occur anymore 3: let me continue but for a small fee to set my mind at ease. Let me explain #3: I think this wi Alex van den Bogaerdt 2007-12-15T14:26:32 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spf.council/864 Hi, I've recently forwarded the old question about the IETF list of "other lists" to the IPR WG again. See <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.ipr/4911> and <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.ipr/5026> for the results. Does that help with your concerns ? IIRC Julian was already satisfied before, if somebody else agrees and nobody disagrees I'd take it as "go". Frank ------------------------------------------- Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com Frank Ellermann 2007-11-15T11:28:47 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.mail.spam.spf.council