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

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:18 AM, David McGrew <mcgrew@cisco.com> wrote:
> On 01/16/2014 03:49 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2014-1-12, at 0:28, Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com> 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 github.com/wbl/safecurvesdraft.
>
> 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
> http://irtf.org/ipr)
>
> 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.

The only IPR issue is with patents, and I'm not incorporating new implementation
methods.

With regards to copyright, so far it's been typos. I'll ask people to
agree to license
their contributions under the terms of BCP whatever it is before
incorporating anything
more substantive.

>
> 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.)

If your assessment of the draft depends on whether or not I work for the NSA,
you are making a terrible mistake. At some point there will be a text
freeze, for
formal last call consideration. At that point, I hope you pretend
every single word
was written by an unholy consortium of everyone who ever wants to subvert
a standard. Read it like a lawyer reading a deal with the devil.
That suspicion and its discussion on the list is the best defense
against mistakes and errors of all kinds.

Sincerely,
Watson Ladd

>
>
> Good points about transparency and IPR.   Thanks Lars.
>
> David
>
>
>
> Lars
>
> PS: This of course applies to all RG work, not only your draft in
> particular.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cfrg mailing list
> Cfrg@irtf.org
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/cfrg
>
>

-- 
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
Temporary Safety deserve neither  Liberty nor Safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin