IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed work-around to thePre-5378 Problem

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Tue, 10 February 2009 18:10 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDAC13A6C83; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:10:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.574
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.574 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.025, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4s7qbxyTs5P4; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:10:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com (sj-iport-6.cisco.com [171.71.176.117]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1BE93A6C7C; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:10:00 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,187,1233532800"; d="scan'208";a="246743052"
Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Feb 2009 18:10:04 +0000
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n1AIA4Rv002994; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:10:04 -0800
Received: from [192.168.4.177] (rcdn-fluffy-8711.cisco.com [10.99.9.18]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1AIA2nV020959; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:10:02 GMT
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: "Contreras, Jorge" <Jorge.Contreras@wilmerhale.com>
In-Reply-To: <50E312B117033946BA23AA102C8134C6031B3C1F@SDCPEXCCL2MX.wilmerhale.com>
Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org
Subject: Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed work-around to thePre-5378 Problem
References: <50E312B117033946BA23AA102C8134C6031B3C1F@SDCPEXCCL2MX.wilmerhale.com>
Message-Id: <FEDEB052-9901-4D53-BE48-99F11B48C12F@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:10:01 -0700
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1580; t=1234289404; x=1235153404; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20<fluffy@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Trustees]=20Last=20Call=20for=20Commen ts=3A=20Proposed=20work-around=20to=20thePre-5378=20Problem |Sender:=20; bh=eY/vk653Yo3z0CbE8OpAp1Ql0nIhVyyNbNOvzOpWMhw=; b=hoIX19C8dArbTUJrjhEGRkYVKRPuKW3eHfSs70aX2dge/69JqL4pyjPk3v cgmJVdFaDHKCSZL1m4QgmPqlOBSjzA35eETFzCCW+//CCVfGofxnJ66njf86 zdJ7qHFdBb;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; );
Cc: Trustees <trustees@ietf.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:10:01 -0000

I've gotten a bit lost on all the changes. Would it be possible to  
send to the list a single email that summarizes the current proposed  
changes to the document published on the web sight? or just a new copy  
of the document?

On Feb 9, 2009, at 5:41 PM, Contreras, Jorge wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Thomas Narten [mailto:narten@us.ibm.com]
>> Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 6:23 PM
>> To: Marshall Eubanks
>> Cc: Contreras, Jorge; Trustees; SM; ietf@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [Trustees] Last Call for Comments: Proposed
>> work-around to thePre-5378 Problem
>>
>>>> NEW PROPOSED
>>>>
>>>>   c. Derivative Works and Publication Limitations.  If a
>> Contributor
>>>>      desires to limit the right to make modifications
>> and derivative
>>
>>> s/desires/needs/
>>
>>> I don't think that "desires" is appropriate here - as John pointed
>>> out, the contributor has no discretion here, except for their
>>> judgement as to whether rights are available.
>>
>> Actually, in this case, it is the submitters choice, since we are
>> talking about case (i) or (ii) (and not (iii) which has been the
>> challenging case).  And "desires" is the wording that has been used
>> here for a while.
>>
>> But that said, a more neutral term is fine by me, since the
>> motivations for needing to select this may vary.
>>
>> How about "chooses"?
>>
>> Thomas
>
> "chooses" is fine with me
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status