Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-00.txt

[Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 4:27 PM Brian E Carpenter <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> > I thought the proposed BCP seemed destined for this page:
> > https://www.ietf.org/about/note-well/ <
> https://www.ietf.org/about/note-well/>
>
> Not necessarily. The lawyers can tell us, but it seems to me that the
> warnings on the Note Well are there to protect the IETF itself, whereas
> this document is more aimed at warning participants to protect themselves.
>

Well, you just wrote "Or maybe we should just wait until somebody gets sued
and blames the IETF for not warning them."

That seemed to indicate you think the document is meant to protect the
IETF. Maybe I misunderstood.


> If so, it doesn't necessarily need to be a BCP. If indeed it's considered
> necessary to protect the IETF itself, the whole discussion changes tone.
>

Agree.


> By the way, I recommend reading Jorge Contreras's slides cited in the LLC's
> statement.
>

I did, and it was not the first time. Several slides seem to be truncated
(maybe just some software incompatibility creeping in).

For example, Slide 4 ends with "Excluding technology/participants for" ...?

thanks,
Rob