Re: BCP97bis

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 17 October 2021 02:31 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC92A3A08B0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Oct 2021 19:31:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=PSp4/BzY; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=G3aX02B8
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DWhWupOBoLx4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Oct 2021 19:31:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35BA43A08AC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Oct 2021 19:31:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 74426 invoked from network); 17 Oct 2021 02:31:50 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=122b7.616b8b16.k2110; bh=2SE5eC5jug70jJU4OoE59nnz9SSBsDF0gfcd9IlPvf8=; b=PSp4/BzYR9Kv203YYM8XlWy/pUpKMoAi2LNaohH0aj50nVfcJtBZQ7JFbJUT4GUz9RRX3s4g1IE7VbsL3F8FdeTuC/HFm0VJDa58f6qV8w/y+r5nDU6PICeXhYBj9RsPTlBEln4Epj9x4zC8g2yVMcZeDhRhrgEruHPluAOBcBRLTEOkguqZkxbyyaS0JrI3oFma7Da0z7aSgUCTZDSKHzr0HPg8njPnXj4ZQelN2Jreb4AdJN/gkBYpfHVLcGLOtDyj8nAk1MFJ2LwzpXMbzbvgonZP6D+j04iKF+eQKx3K57lve5oxrdoXlmIyXqywS9qtQOcsylAkDDZdaEsPqw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=122b7.616b8b16.k2110; bh=2SE5eC5jug70jJU4OoE59nnz9SSBsDF0gfcd9IlPvf8=; b=G3aX02B8QzKfVv4JSxU968KuuEyP91w4j2uq13lnO4iTKoZiLcrkbRrwLu+WFhv3n+HvPlU7pD/0A3bFnJsdSD3NsG3rrw/Wbu/b28Aifen4ltV+gp1+XRrWsI8OszZHgwfoOXQVhz2aCfWRyF22Dp39z1r1AGBNzw4xLOve5BxwXk3g7wbFwS/qvjI0Hx3fyuFdqoiv2JUlOmHvir0zDvhlbprmbc5blzvwe36img6uacT1MbK7wx98tCY16RlL21NUTalGt4qY8ktVgNI1k6aZ2+lf8eVG5ze2h5+nD2rjkp90O8Mvl9Lws4YguCsBgclAPufrdV1u5BskWTjw4A==
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 17 Oct 2021 02:31:49 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id ECA882A72FA8; Sat, 16 Oct 2021 22:31:48 -0400 (EDT)
Date: 16 Oct 2021 22:31:48 -0400
Message-Id: <20211017023148.ECA882A72FA8@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: BCP97bis
In-Reply-To: <6702b78c-037f-f5fd-78a6-901a999dab54@gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/40DIlyuos2f0Wx0jAqjVmM48F4g>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2021 02:31:59 -0000

It appears that Brian E Carpenter  <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> said:
>If I have this right (and Scott Bradner will probably correct me if
>I'm wrong), the basic rules in RFC2026 section 7.1.1 recognize the reality
>that some open standards are essential and unavoidable references which
>are not available free of charge to the general public.
>
>To be clear, the phrase "open standard" in that section doesn't
>mean "free of charge". (Long essay on what it *does* mean elided.)

As I am sure you are aware, our model of giving away copies of our
standards for free used to be extremely unusual, and is still far from
universal. Historically, SDOs like ANSI and ISO got a lot of their
funding from selling paper copies of their standards. I have a bunch
of paper ANSI standards that I bought a long time ago, at their office
in Times Square and paid with a paper check.

R's.
John

PS: It probably would be best not to inquire too closely about the status of RFC 20.