Re: [codec] Last Call: <draft-ietf-codec-oggopus-10.txt> (Ogg Encapsulation for the Opus Audio Codec) to Proposed Standard

["Ben Campbell" <[e-mail]>]

On 2 Feb 2016, at 22:19, Timothy B. Terriberry wrote:

> Ron wrote:
>> And we are specifically not proposing to give *anyone*, open source 
>> or
>> otherwise, "the option to take an RFC and “run with it”" ...
>>
>> We're trying to find consensus on the best way to apply BCP 78 and 
>> the
>> options outlined in RFC 5377 to the needs of this document, in a way
>> that best matches the needs of its intended users to the best 
>> interests
>> of the IETF.
>
> It seems to me like putting a BSD copyright header in an XML comment 
> at the top of the XML source file and dropping Section 13 from the 
> draft would resolve all of the issues, if everyone agrees that is an 
> acceptable thing to do. Ron?

I think that's acceptable in theory. In practice, keep in mind that if 
someone uses xml2rfc to render the text, it's going to create IETF 
headers and boilerplate, at least if the "external" version of the XML 
uses the same settings.

That's probably not what you want, regardless of whether the section 13 
language stays or goes.

How did this end up working for 6716?

Ben.