Re: Blue Sheet Change Proposal

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Fri, 04 April 2008 14:38 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B55B3A6946; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 07:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
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 3AA5728C42F for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 07:38:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.146
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.146 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.453, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 s0-zqxXyPcrw for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 07:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A69353A6946 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 07:38:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw750.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.50]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m34EcYHC009203; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 09:38:34 -0500
Received: from eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.53]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 4 Apr 2008 09:38:34 -0500
Received: from [142.133.10.140] ([142.133.10.140]) by eusrcmw750.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 4 Apr 2008 09:38:34 -0500
Message-ID: <47F63D21.6000304@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:37:21 -0400
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hadriel Kaplan <HKaplan@acmepacket.com>
Subject: Re: Blue Sheet Change Proposal
References: <47F56545.4020603@isoc.org> <200804032322.m33NMgbH052817@drugs.dv.isc.org> <20080404001204.AF5AC5081A@romeo.rtfm.com> <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC30BCBDE823C@mail.acmepacket.com>
In-Reply-To: <E6C2E8958BA59A4FB960963D475F7AC30BCBDE823C@mail.acmepacket.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Apr 2008 14:38:34.0185 (UTC) FILETIME=[8F658B90:01C89661]
Cc: IETF Discussion <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-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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Hadriel Kaplan wrote:
> 
> I think he means if the sheet is truly used for proof of presence and IPR awareness then it's not good enough to allow name collisions.  
> But I don't see how blue sheets would hold any strength anyway for that purpose, because 
> 1) signing doesn't mean I was there the whole time, and (2) doesn't mean I had stopped reading emails and was paying attention.  

And in addition, somebody could be in the room AND be aware of IPR and 
NOT SIGN the blue sheet. There is nothing saying that people in the room 
have to sign a blue sheet. I, for one, have seen people pass around blue 
sheets without signing.

Cheers
Suresh

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf