Re: How IETF treats contributors
Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com> Mon, 30 August 2004 17:08 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA09231; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:08:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1pfp-0000KE-8n; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 13:10:29 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pTH-0007YU-9H; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:57:31 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C1pOV-0006kv-My for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:52:36 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA07991 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:52:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from numenor.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.58]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C1pQI-0008Qz-MH for ietf@ietf.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 12:54:28 -0400
Received: from magus.qualcomm.com (magus.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.148]) by numenor.qualcomm.com (8.12.10/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id i7UGpv1i024271 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:51:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [129.46.227.161] (carbuncle.qualcomm.com [129.46.227.161]) by magus.qualcomm.com (8.12.10/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id i7UGptRE007397; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:51:56 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: hardie@mage.qualcomm.com
Message-Id: <p06110403bd5906118d89@[129.46.227.161]>
In-Reply-To: <20040830090627.GA22982@danisch.de>
References: <20040830090627.GA22982@danisch.de>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:51:54 -0700
To: Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@danisch.de>, ietf@ietf.org
From: Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081
Subject: Re: How IETF treats contributors
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793
At 11:06 AM +0200 8/30/04, Hadmut Danisch wrote: ><original cut here> >But in my opinion, the least a contributor can expect is that >derivative work based on his contribution does acknowledge and cite >the contribution correctly and does not pass the contribution as >someone else's work. Correct me if I'm wrong. > >The SenderID core draft does not cite RMX adequatly. >I have asked the MARID and ASRG chairs that RMX is cited correctly >when turning the SenderID draft into an RFC. They denied. It's a >commercial Microsoft and Pobox show. The current MARID core draft contains the following acknowledgement section: 9. Acknowledgements Variations on the idea of using a DNS record to check the legitimacy of an email address have occurred multiple times. The earliest known work is [Vixie]; others include [RMX], [SPF] and [CallerID]. The current document borrows heavily from each of the above, and incorporates ideas proposed by many members of the MARID working group. The contributions of each of the above are gratefully acknowledged. RMX was submitted to the IETF as subject to all provisions of section 10 of RFC 2026, which means it allowed the IETF to create derivative works. It was cited as an input draft to the MARID working group, and it was recommended for publication as an Experimental RFC with the other input drafts that came out of the ASRG process. In other words, the IETF took you up on your offer to consider the draft seriously and to use it as input into the evolving standard in this area. My view is that the current editors of the working group drafts have done what they should to cite Paul Vixie, you, and the original SPF and Caller-ID drafts as antecedents to the current draft. This draft is an evolution of a lot of thinking by a lot of people, and many members of the working group will be acknowledged only implicitly, as is common for many IETF drafts. I hope all of the participants understand, though, that their work is appreciated. We're all here to make sure that the Internet runs and develops as best it can; and while acknowledgements are important, I hope we all see a thriving Internet as our real reward. regards, Ted Hardie _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- How IETF treats contributors Hadmut Danisch
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Ted Hardie
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Paul Vixie
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Marc Blanchet
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Dean Anderson
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Dean Anderson
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Ted Hardie
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Dean Anderson
- Re: How IETF treats contributors william(at)elan.net
- RE: How IETF treats contributors Christian Huitema
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Dean Anderson
- Re: How IETF treats contributors John Day
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Clint Chaplin
- RE: How IETF treats contributors Thomas Gal
- RE: How IETF treats contributors Nick Carter
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Olaf M. Kolkman
- RE: How IETF treats contributors Scott Bradner
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Vernon Schryver
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Paul Vixie
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Paul Vixie
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Hadmut Danisch
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Hadmut Danisch
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Hadmut Danisch
- RE: How IETF treats contributors ned.freed
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Dean Anderson
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Dean Anderson
- Re: How IETF treats contributors william(at)elan.net
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: How IETF treats contributors Nathaniel Borenstein
- Re: How IETF treats contributors ned.freed
- Re: How IETF treats contributors grenville armitage