IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Topic drift Re: An Internet Draft as reference material

Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU> Sun, 01 October 2000 15:50 UTC

Received: by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) id LAA09846 for ietf-outbound.10@ietf.org; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 11:50:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from munnari.OZ.AU (munnari.OZ.AU [128.250.1.21]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id LAA09775 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 11:43:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mundamutti.cs.mu.OZ.AU ([128.250.1.5]) by munnari.OZ.AU with SMTP (5.83--+1.3.1+0.59) id PA10620; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 02:42:53 +1100 (from kre@munnari.OZ.AU)
From: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
To: vint cerf <vcerf@MCI.NET>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Topic drift Re: An Internet Draft as reference material
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 01 Oct 2000 11:16:31 EDT." <4.3.2.7.2.20001001111311.020b89d0@shoe.reston.mci.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 02:42:52 +1100
Message-Id: <18651.970414972@mundamutti.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
X-Loop: ietf@ietf.org

    Date:        Sun, 01 Oct 2000 11:16:31 -0400
    From:        vint cerf <vcerf@MCI.NET>
    Message-ID:  <4.3.2.7.2.20001001111311.020b89d0@shoe.reston.mci.net>

  | I think the I-D are explicitly NOT public domain.

As a general rule, absolutely, I agree.   However, drafts that I happen
to write which are WG output explicitly are public domain (they all say
that inside them).   See draft-ietf-ftpext-mlst-12.txt for a current
example.  Or any of the earlier versions of that doc, should you be
able to find them.

As usual, I probably wasn't being very clear in my message.  I referred
only to drafts I submit - I can't speak for what other authors do, or
desire.

kre

ps: the ftpext mlst draft mentioned above also raises the question of why anyone
would want to archive *all* old drafts - not having source material available
has to be a problem to historians, and others.   Having too much of it has to
be just as big a problem.   The only thing that having one of the old mlst
drafts around would achieve for posterity would be to demonstrate that I can't
count beyond 10 ... when someone pointed out that I was unable to count, an
updated draft was submitted with "twelve" changed to "fourteen" which was
really obvious to anyone was what it should have been (except apparently me).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email