The IETF Secretariat services was informed of this general problem a couple weeks ago. The spam is going directly to the mail list archive so at least it's not ending up in inboxes. Unfortunately there's still some wrangling over what an appropriate solution would be. I assure you our best email people are already complaining to the admins! Patrik may be able to manually clean up the archive if that would help perceptions. Lisa On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 6:58 AM, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > > The spam in the uri-review archive is causing editors of > potential new schemes to back away from using it, > even though per RFC 4395 it's the official forum. > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4395.txt > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > > From: Joseph A Holsten <joseph@josephholsten.com> > > To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> > > Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Lachlan > > Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au> > > Subject: Re: Registering the about: URI scheme > > Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:04:26 -0600 > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Julian, > > Everything sounds fine, some questions inline. > > > > Julian Reschke wrote: > > > - on the front page, note where feedback should go (IMHO the best > > > place would be the IETF uri-review mailing list) > > I haven't seen any other draft do this, so I'm unsure of where should > > this go. Abstract? uri-review sounds fine. Too bad the place is a > > spam haven: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/uri-review > > -- > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ > gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E > > >
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2009 18:09:42 UTC