[Agentx] Fw: Boilerplate changes Required for TLP 4.0

["Randy Presuhn" <[e-mail]>]

Hi -

Forwarded for your information.

Randy

----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Marshall Eubanks" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Cc: "Trustees" <[e-mail]>; "Working Group Chairs" <[e-mail]>; "Internet Research Steering Group" <[e-mail]>;
"RFC Interest" <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 3:47 AM
> Subject: Boilerplate changes Required for TLP 4.0
>
> Colleagues,
>
> Some concerns have been raised about tooling issues and boilerplate
> changes. At present, for example, xml2rfc is not supported, and
> because of this it is not clear when it will be possible to update it
> to support the new boilerplate.  However, Alternate Stream documents
> have been blocked for some time waiting for the new Trust Legal
> Provisions (TLP), and it was decided to unblock these documents with
> TLP 4.0 even in the absence of xml2rfc support. (There is an open call
> for volunteers to support xml2rfc, and I would encourage interested
> parties to contact Russ Housley.)
>
>      The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
>      NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and
>      "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
>      RFC 2119.
>
> If for any reason the tool of your choice has not been upgraded by the
> end of the grace period on February 1 then the following two minor
> changes need to be made to Internet-Draft boilerplates before
> submission. Note that the changes are different for IETF Stream and
> for Alternate Stream Documents. The changes for the IETF stream are
> editorial (as noted by a SHOULD in the text below) and drafts produced
> by the current tools for that stream are therefore compliant with TLP
> 4.0.  The changes for the other streams are required (as noted by a
> MUST in the text below).
>
> -----
>
> For IETF Stream Documents the following changes SHOULD be made :
>
> Change 1 :
> OLD:
> This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
> provisions of BCP 78 and
> BCP 79.
>
> NEW:
> This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
> provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
>
> EXPLANATION:
> Dropped the words "to IETF" as there is some ambiguity with respect to
> Internet drafts that are not submitted to be published as IETF Stream
> RFCs.
>
> Change 2 :
>
> Second : Different Treatment for IETF and non-IETF stream documents
> regarding potential BSD licenses for code components.
>
> OLD:
> Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified
> BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal
> Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the BSD
> License.
>
> NEW:
> Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified
> BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal
> Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the
> Simplified BSD License.
>
> EXPLANATION: Introduction of the word "Simplified" at the second use
> of "BSD License" for clarity.
>
> -----
>
> For Alternate Stream Documents the following changes MUST be made
>
> Change 1 :
> OLD:
> This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
> provisions of BCP 78 and
> BCP 79.
>
> NEW:
> This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
> provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
>
> EXPLANATION:
> Dropped the words "to IETF" as there is some ambiguity with respect to
> Internet drafts that are not submitted to be published as IETF Stream
> RFCs.
>
> Change 2 :
>
> OLD:
> Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified
> BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal
> Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the BSD
> License.
>
> NEW: This sentence must not be included (note that this text MUST NOT
> be inserted in the document).
>
> EXPLANATION: The BSD license is not available for code components from
> Alternate Stream documents.
>
> Regards
> Marshall Eubanks
>