Re: mDNS needs something like this

[Thomas Narten <[e-mail]>]

draft-ymbk-opcode-discover-01.txt contains the wording:

> >This document is an Internet-Draft and is NOT offered in accordance with
> >Section 10 of RFC2026, and the author does not provide the IETF with any
> >rights other than to publish as an Internet-Draft. This document is a
> >submission to the domain name system extentions (DNSEXT) working group
> >of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments may be submitted
> >to the working group mailing list at "[e-mail]" or the
> >author.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.


> It has been pointed out to me that the above copyright is not in
> compliance with section 10 in RFC2026 thus no IETF working groups
> can consider this document.

To clarify a bit.

The above boilerplate is contradictory. On the one hand, the submitter
does not grant the IETF/WG any rights to excerpt text, modify it,
etc., as is the norm in IETF WGs. The only right granted is to publish
as an ID.  On the other hand, the above text says this document is a
submission to the WG. The WG shouldn't be accepting submissions that
it has no change control over. That is not the IETF way.

Note that it is possible (and appropriate) to submit IDs with a "only
publish as an ID" type clause in limited circumstances. For example,
there may be times when an outside standards body wishes to make
available one of its internal documents for the IETF to look at, but
there is no intention that the document will be published as an RFC or
modified in any way by the IETF, and the originating standards body
wishes to retain full control over the text.

However, draft-ymbk-opcode-discover-01.txt would not appear to be one
of those types of documents.

Finally, the above boilerplate also (by design) sidesteps the question
of whether all the rules in Section 10 of RFC 2026 are applicable and
are being followed. Again, avoiding that question is not appropriate
for a document intended to be a WG contribution.

If this document is really intended as a legitimate submission to a
WG, it should be resubmitted with appropriate boilerplate.

Comments/disagreements on this would best be taken to poisson, as the
issues have nothing at all to do with the content of the document.

Thomas

to unsubscribe send a message to [e-mail] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.