Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-eggert-ietf-and-trust-00.txt

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 22 October 2022 00:13 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED98C1522BD for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SqRmda5hTx04 for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52e.google.com (mail-pg1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C04F6C14CE34 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id b5so3918192pgb.6 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:to:from :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=mB9+nQcfLL7VdI1PVaTCbM49PyUU+QtRZIKr19Wszn0=; b=oeGr2SJ1ftPtSkyLWjWR+grKCneq9M/9rq49RD5V9IUG60w/h1SPuX7k5w3qqAYJR0 l2kIc5XQseU/F9h2gCLSG+9+umhba1KJp1QOqw2Es1GvDdiGdekkQ+WP5+TrVqTwd1A7 s3Mg/9spBBjESpkZZQ5wHTZtC5RYHjJ1z+aq23dmBMY+/Id72GisrDjBBbLL3NEYEi1+ pDERlGybnGEkW/R7SX+fIgNAXnsNMtoaOd+XxhMDb9KPVD6WrdM985QrDzFYZtaUVDoq LFNN0lRBeUia9UyfWUra9dEanP3J6gtbwvqlO0uFyNKij87r9BPPd7jvtdS86ygZs5Gr vnbg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:to:from :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=mB9+nQcfLL7VdI1PVaTCbM49PyUU+QtRZIKr19Wszn0=; b=LV9ZVhNtHgaCQvy3kn+p6zl70lvVxux24LqT0SMoMvQQsokIFR8ht4bfb97vPyNKlj b7dOec8II5YJ1pTlSxVOUkV/iHz4iZphmV/aEofP5aGU+2eMuBuoGfsHpfWswIUtq2Ni zFZfdQxiBggLGyG41EzHy14CwZPSdPIFvaVfdI2uWeiuFVRAaE+oRbuto7v79b6DASLV 4XC2Shz2L3C1rKgJnYUFajin7ts3hxTCuQrj9nJEGAgAT3RdDYkIgSV+RMlLBJ2kzg5l YozGIv7ngZPSkkU4Qq0VvVizomGD83I93rlqOhlvHRjaC79Npd0P+WUJSi6SoTIs562I v95w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1oey6yITQIk+A4gdGV376XjWO96iMcAWir6Li1/q8QyFk9g0an Xazhy4lXwhEkALmUxbjprXANMeZ+DROVTA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7e8xsmmgEqPPDKKB+Dnc1Ro6GDHAD1Iex5ULrfpSoE/IQhqC/0n9q67bPxSdHN7K6DnaAhJA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a02:112:b0:440:5515:b908 with SMTP id bg18-20020a056a02011200b004405515b908mr18579021pgb.13.1666397576884; Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPV6:2406:e003:1124:9301:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:1124:9301:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y5-20020a17090a134500b002005fcd2cb4sm390306pjf.2.2022.10.21.17.12.55 for <gendispatch@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 21 Oct 2022 17:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <e84654be-992c-a9f2-1467-11e6d85120df@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2022 13:12:52 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0
Content-Language: en-US
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
To: gendispatch@ietf.org
References: <166618665532.36034.10051696461370688223@ietfa.amsl.com> <459bd8ff-5dcb-d2cd-9948-d492ba69cc17@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <459bd8ff-5dcb-d2cd-9948-d492ba69cc17@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/C3Yk9sNVaOlIhpdbAP0LqEzjHmU>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-eggert-ietf-and-trust-00.txt
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2022 00:13:01 -0000

Oh, I just noticed this in the "Asset register" section:

> The current known licensing position of every RFC.

That's impossible if taken literally. Firstly, that would require more than 9000 executions of due diligence, which isn't going to happen. Secondly, it's impossible (especially for pre-RFC5378 documents and even more so for pre-IETF RFCs). Thirdly, non-IETF RFCs are out of scope for an IETF BCP.

I don't understand the claim that the current asset register is incomplete, since it indicates that the TLP applies to both contributions and RFCs, and the TLP describes the licenses.

> no "licenses to others" are being shown after 2015

That's plausible. The general license provisions for fair use avoid the need for licenses in most cases.

Anyway - maintaining the asset register is an operational matter. It should not be the target of a BCP.

Regards
    Brian

On 22-Oct-22 10:08, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I can't find anything in this draft that I disagree with. However, I can't really see why it's needed as a BCP, since it doesn't seem to me that it changes anything. I'd be happy to see this material on the Trust's web site as FYI.
> 
> Regards
>      Brian Carpenter
> 
> On 20-Oct-22 02:37, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>
>>
>>           Title           : The Relationship between the IETF and its Trust
>>           Authors         : Lars Eggert
>>                             Russ Housley
>>     Filename        : draft-eggert-ietf-and-trust-00.txt
>>     Pages           : 13
>>     Date            : 2022-10-19
>>
>> Abstract:
>>      This document describes the expectations the IETF community has on
>>      the structure and operation of the IETF Trust.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eggert-ietf-and-trust/
>>
>> There is also an HTML version available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-eggert-ietf-and-trust-00.html
>>
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt