Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfc-editor.org mailing lists don't add "Archived-At"?

From: "Glen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 13:56:03 -0700

Hello Lars -

I haven't seen any replies, so, speaking only as the operator for both the
IETF and the RFC-Editor, I will try to answer those questions for you.

> From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
> Subject: [Tools-discuss] rfc-editor.org mailing lists don't add
"Archived-At"?
> Am I correct in my understanding that rfc-editor.org mailing lists don't
add
> "Archived-At" headers? 

You are correct.

> Also, are there any other lists that "we" host that don't add
"Archived-At" headers?

No, there are no lists we (the IETF) host that don't add those headers.  The
IETF currently hosts all of its list on its central server grid, across
several domains, and they all have that header added.  In the case of the
IETF, the Archived-At headers are added as one of the many functions of the
IETF's custom Postconfirm program, which interfaces with the IETF's custom
Mail Archive tool.  Both of those tools are IETF-owned products, and
deployed on the IETF servers, providing those custom features to the IETF
and the lists it runs.

(As an aside, the IETF also provides "mirrors" of some external lists'
archives, wherein we are not the primary provider of the list, but our
archive system is just "subscribed" to that external list as a member.
Those messages do not have the Archived-At header added to them, because the
list messages come from an external source, and feed directly into the IETF
Mail Archive, without actually being "processed" by the IETF mail chain.)

But "We the IETF" don't actually host the RFC Editor mailing lists.  Those
lists are hosted on the RFC-Editor's servers, and are used by the Editor
staff, and operated by the RFC-Editor.   The custom systems used by the IETF
are not deployed on or used by the RFC-Editor's servers in any way.   The
RFC-Editor deployment is just a "normal" Mailman instance, with the normal
Mailman archives.

> Could we add that? 

Anything is possible given appropriate circumstances, and there are
different approaches we could take.   I believe that the primary concerns
are keeping the RFC-Editor's systems severable, and not disrupting the
operations of the RFC Production Center or their staff.  

With that in mind, one approach might be to develop custom code for the
RFC-Editor Mailman instance which would put a more-or-less generic
Archived-At header into the messages that go through the list.  As a simple
example, an Archived-at header could be added which points to the monthly
index for the message, as in
https://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/2021-July/ .   That would
require, I guess, an RFP from the IETF?  RFC-Editor?, and could be deployed
(I would hope) in a reasonably non-invasive way to the RFC-Editor servers.

Other approaches no doubt exist, but this would be the simplest one I could
think of.

> PS: I also see that rfc-editor.org mailing lists are not searchable via
> mailarchive. That also seems like a feature we'd want.

I'm given to understand that the primary public lists, RFC-DIST, and
RFC-INTEREST, should be searchable.  They are certainly browse-able, at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-dist/ and
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfc-interest/  .  For those, we
took the same approach we took with other external lists, and we just do an
external feed into the IETF Mail Archive.  The primary archives are, of
course, still on the RFC-Editor server, but the IETF Mail Archive does have
the full copies available as shown above.   If there are other lists that
the RFC-Editor wants to share across, setting that up would be trivial.

I hope this information is helpful, please feel free to contact me directly
if you have any additional questions, and I will always do whatever I can to
assist!

Glen
--
Glen Barney
IT Director
AMS (IETF and RPC Secretariat)

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 16:52:15 -0500

> RFC-Editor deployment is just a "normal" Mailman instance, with the normal

Are there any other sets of mailing lists in the halo of 
domains/services that someone might expect to be accessible via the 
imap/mailarchive interfaces that currently aren't?

I think all of the IAB and IRTF lists are available. What's missing 
other than the rfc-editor lists?

> ___________________________________________________________
> Tools-discuss mailing list - [email-masked]
> This list is for discussion, not for action requests or bug reports.
> * Report datatracker and mailarchive bugs to: [email-masked]
> * Report tools.ietf.org bugs to: [email-masked]
> * Report all other bugs or issues to: [email-masked]
> List info (including how to Unsubscribe): https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss

---

From: "Glen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2021 15:05:23 -0700

Hi -

> other than the rfc-editor lists?

To my knowledge, nothing.   But I would not consider the RPC lists to be in that halo, so there may be other things "out there" that I'm not aware of.

For all the things I manage and am aware of, nothing should be missing.

Glen

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 15:54:04 -0400

ps: I really like the RFC-editor's use of lists for the clusters.

AFAIK, these lists and communications with the RPC are not publically
archived, but probably they are implicitely public.   At least, I'm pretty sure
that they aren't priviledged in any way, and would be trivially discoverable
in a court case.

That's one advantage of the Archived-At: header: it makes it really obvious
when something is explicitely public.  Maybe it should ... a standard :-)
(Maybe it is already)

Maybe we ought to package our mailing list system into a few containers, and
sell/lease/lend them to other entities.   RIPE? ARIN? Linux Foundation?
Maybe we could lighten our load here by sharing.
(I've been told that Glen is moving towards containers for everything)

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

---

From: "Glen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 13:25:04 -0700

Having been summoned by name :-) ...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
> To: Glen <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] rfc-editor.org mailing lists don't add "Archived-
> At"?

> (I've been told that Glen is moving towards containers for everything)

I'm gratified that you think I'm a "mover" :-) - I try to be as proactive on things as I can.  But, just so nobody gets the wrong idea....

I am *supporting* moving towards containers for as many things as make sense so to do.   I've had long discussions with the IETF (Jay and Robert, mainly - pity them!) to hammer out best practices and clarify my own understanding of the challenges involved.  Like most of us, I love new technologies (and, let's be honest!, new *toys*), and containerization has some exciting aspects that I really like.  I am working hard - in my "copious" free time - to better learn and understand the operational nuances of Docker, Podman, K8S, and related technologies, and hope to build out some really great future infrastructure using these technologies, so that my team and I can better support these things for the IETF, as they move their tools and services into the future.

But I do not "move" the IETF, I just *serve* the IETF.  :-)

Glen