Re: [Cfrg] Editing work on github of draft-ladd-safecurves

"Eggert, Lars" <> Thu, 16 January 2014 08:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B84661AE207 for <>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:49:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.44
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.44 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fWDAri_QsKR2 for <>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:49:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568BF1AE1FC for <>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:49:53 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.95,666,1384329600"; d="asc'?scan'208"; a="137268380"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 16 Jan 2014 00:49:41 -0800
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:49:41 -0800
From: "Eggert, Lars" <>
To: Watson Ladd <>
Thread-Topic: [Cfrg] Editing work on github of draft-ladd-safecurves
Thread-Index: AQHPDyTDJDIJMBmf5keQ7V7osdjDrpqHl5+A
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 08:49:40 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_063B0DE8-097C-4FA0-8E8C-9FF1FA7E086D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Cfrg] Editing work on github of draft-ladd-safecurves
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Crypto Forum Research Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 08:49:54 -0000


On 2014-1-12, at 0:28, Watson Ladd <> wrote:
> To avoid clogging up the IETF with endless revisions, I've decided to
> do the wordsmithing on github. Emails to me are still excellent ways
> of communicating issues, but for those inclined to do typo work and
> other valuable (and underappreciated) editing efforts, feel free to
> examine an up-to-date copy at

we need to be careful here. When people post suggestions to this mailing list, they know they are making contributions to the IRTF and IETF, and so they are obligated to make IPR disclosures, when applicable. (See

When you incorporate text or ideas that were emailed to you personally, those private emails to you are NOT "contributions to the IETF/IRTF", because they are not sent to one of our lists. That means people need not disclose IPR, and when you (in good faith) incorporate their ideas or text, undisclosed IPR may end up in your document.

It's therefore safest to only incorporate ideas and text that were sent on the public list.

(That also lets everyone know who made suggestions for edits. In light of the long recent discussion on how we can prevent bad actors from subverting our standards, having all of this on the list increases transparency, which is in the end our best defense.)


PS: This of course applies to all RG work, not only your draft in particular.