Re: [93attendees] Network experiment during the meeting

Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com> Wed, 15 July 2015 17:06 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.botzko@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE2F1B2AEA for <93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:06:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h3mElbaWkxWM for <93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x229.google.com (mail-ig0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9635C1A1AC6 for <93attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by igvi1 with SMTP id i1so81981516igv.1 for <93attendees@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=T2zsBPeWWpbkrzJfTUBu/viuWdJr7Z1IQj7SHcdgWMM=; b=ru2cGKpDwVlay7vpzp01Oz9RiYy0h5f+TqlC0XuVbuADbbuQrqhbujZR1tSquUyWpr ojilJ6lPfbljtbbE/CKiT2sGDkk+cB5Lm3ILzAlrjn7WEbesmrKh5cfJVzHCBKus8CEk bJ+bpoC82jB0gk085FgLqGKxnqwy3TlnWTQOXmfOlSnnGFKMcPScY9JbGHU//rbzeLKZ xRWVORaHu4YLf0JYlzy5uyywK1S8xeDWYEbWkQQXR8+xs13la6xu7tL/TmiaEu3GnxI9 93OUk3VORoN0xz1HpK5IwBC/RwPZBTbVwbDKtuGYXYygHwmuCAQXPNTGumtVpJ2aDrJD vqWw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.72.41 with SMTP id a9mr25380581igv.51.1436979983048; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.100.130 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:06:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20150715170215.GU1862@cisco.com>
References: <CAO_Rpc+-fQBU+MuOR03VHDgw3HcbOWPcThUR3nR2Vnj9CcM63w@mail.gmail.com> <C2443FFD-988C-4B31-ADB3-3AEAD994387A@isoc.org> <CAO_RpcKCYBxOW9eYLUCD2qiPuAQE3-tj8hwe_AXVJYUr+Y4h=g@mail.gmail.com> <D1CBF04C.50692%evyncke@cisco.com> <20150715121528.GA7114@puck.nether.net> <55A6629E.8050700@dcrocker.net> <20150715135804.GP1862@cisco.com> <55A671D6.9020707@dcrocker.net> <20150715154753.GS1862@cisco.com> <CAMC7SJ6RGjdnV91PNtA-o6B_VXG0hfhpx54nvvqet002rHtzKQ@mail.gmail.com> <20150715170215.GU1862@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:06:22 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMC7SJ5OOcfpRPymiHsVwZXzWx2=CWCVhKAgMCBvPvhJmv7=fg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stephen Botzko <stephen.botzko@gmail.com>
To: Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdca41e706887051aecf91f
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/93attendees/bxpiHOUvAP0u5QKgfgYfommVS-I>
Cc: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>, dcrocker@bbiw.net, "93attendees@ietf.org" <93attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [93attendees] Network experiment during the meeting
X-BeenThere: 93attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 93 attendees that have opted in on this list. " <93attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/93attendees>, <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/93attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:93attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/93attendees>, <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:06:25 -0000

On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Toerless Eckert <eckert@cisco.com>; wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:56:35PM -0400, Stephen Botzko wrote:
> > >>>
> > I think the note well is trying to do its best to idemnify the IETF
> > and its participants against lawsuits claiming infringing on trade secret
> > or claims of novelty for things mentioned in public at the IETF.
> > >>>
> > There is *nothing* in the Note Well (nor in the RFCs it references) about
> > indemnification.
>
> Sure, but the note well does not explain why the IETF does it, and
> why it has attendees accept it.
>
> s/idemnify/protect/ ?
>
No.
to protect (someone) *by promising to pay for the cost...*

Cheers.

>
> Cheers
>    Toerless
>