Re: [antitrust-policy] Who enforces an Antitrust Policy for the IETF

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Sat, 21 January 2012 20:19 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C3FF21F84EF for <antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:19:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gd8Ktu+yiR1o for <antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:19:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEADC21F8493 for <antitrust-policy@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 12:19:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A9089A4772; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:19:14 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1mBEf7YQColS; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:19:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [192.168.2.104] (pool-96-241-165-215.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.241.165.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 221699A4740; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:19:14 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201211433570.30864@joyce.lan>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 15:19:10 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A919478F-1BE2-42E9-A947-372193AF6E1F@vigilsec.com>
References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201211433570.30864@joyce.lan>
To: "John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: antitrust-policy@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [antitrust-policy] Who enforces an Antitrust Policy for the IETF
X-BeenThere: antitrust-policy@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss the need for an antitrust or competition policy for the IETF." <antitrust-policy.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/antitrust-policy>, <mailto:antitrust-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/antitrust-policy>
List-Post: <mailto:antitrust-policy@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:antitrust-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/antitrust-policy>, <mailto:antitrust-policy-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 20:19:12 -0000

John:

> Information about what the law says, yes, policy, no.

It seems to me that the information will be most effective if if is cast in light of IETF activities.  So, how would the strawman be different in providing the desired information (other than removing the RFC 2119 language).

Russ