Subject: *** Please Note: Subject line convention for discussions ***

From: Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 21:10:26 -0800

Erik Guttman previously posted the following procedure for discussions:

>When discussing an issue, please put the issue number and title in the
>subject line, for instance
>
>  Subject: Re: [LL1] Preferred use of configured to v4 LL address
>  Subject: Text needed for [LL1]: Preferred use of configured to v4 LL
>           address
>  etc.
>
>For last calls on particular issues the subject line will look like:
>
>  Subject: WG action - 1 week to discuss [LL1]
>
>And later
>
>  Subject: WG action - [LL1] Accepted 
>
>(or Rejected, etc.)

I request that people adhere to the convention, specifically:

The subject line should contain "LL<number>", with no space between the 
"LL" and the number. If an email legitimately pertains to more than one 
issue, then the subject line can contain more than one "LL" tag.

With the volume of traffic on the list (66 new messages over the weekend 
and 71 new messages so far today), it is very hard for everyone to keep 
track of what is being said. The ability to filter mail for "subject 
containing 'LL2'" (for example) provides an easy way to quickly see all 
the opinions being expressed on this issue. If people start adopting 
other conventions, like, "Issue 2", or "Topic 2" or just "[2]", etc., 
then the ability to sort and filter usefully based on subject line is 
diminished.

Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
 * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer, Inc.
 * Chairman, IETF Zeroconf
 * www.stuartcheshire.org

---

From: Robert Elz <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 17:28:22 +0700

Date:        Mon, 10 Feb 2003 21:10:26 -0800
    From:        Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
    Message-ID:  <[email-masked]>

  | I request that people adhere to the convention, specifically:

[With no hat of any kind to put on, so take this for what it is worth...]

I'd also like to ask that people explicitly say what their position is
when replying, and not leave it to readers to guess...

I believe that there are three reasonable responses to each of these
issues...

1. The proposal is OK as it stands.  (or "accept")
2. There is no issue that needs resolving here.   (or "reject")
3. There is an issue, but the proposed solution isn't acceptable.

In the third case, an alternate proposal should be made, or someone else's
earlier alternate proposal should be agreed with.   Ideally an alternate
proposal should give text that would be included, and indicate where it
would go, but as a minimum it should be clear what is being suggested be
changed.   (Sometimes an alternate proposal may be, or may become, a
new issue, but requiring that seems like too much overhead to me - in some
cases the "alternate proposal" might just mean editorial changes).

kre