Re: Proposed Update to Note Well

Barry Leiba <> Fri, 22 June 2012 15:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EE5021F86B2; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:27:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.944
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.944 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZfrQgHPoUyUH; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F34221F8687; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qcsg15 with SMTP id g15so1513052qcs.27 for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=wsmQavpekCA3PbRjHOfP5IR+J1UVY6R9tNw8zIptlwA=; b=zxNYqLwmEkz8URmjrZRA41ATNMqZ7uwLUp+Df+i2+Nmr9//DUS/HjUe5w+BRgC0DN/ qZYWMn01EpuGRtoS5VONuv9ZHjArD7lKNA7g7cO1wBjOHtrxxHqT3Ir0wb10jwzHLCLZ 08XKfizn9/JMBAemo0T2+rwsZOAXzPH2X0ejuwieiscU73vdA3n5ePEhiyq0W8pcZbdB iUT7IppdjfD9AksTYUhU2M1R1p1BnTW2XrjAdZgYpqaN7WHi0Q0IV/tdgV4BtmWq2kVh JM9wAkehmpj8higQQbiUqdoEILwK88hIZHY0RcPi5bqBife//J3HUjmdaSjGvLTblIHX kBmA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id ex2mr6942311qab.58.1340378833012; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:27:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:27:12 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: PnaLMaaUGxPbboTMiH92dD48xjc
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: Proposed Update to Note Well
From: Barry Leiba <>
To: Peter Saint-Andre <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:27:15 -0000

> You're right on both counts. So (and addressing Randy's concern):
>   Anything that you write, say, or discuss in the IETF, formally or
>   informally, either at an IETF meeting or in another IETF venue
>   such as a mailing list, is an IETF contribution.  If you believe
>   that any contribution of yours is covered by a patent or patent
>   application controlled by you or an organization with which you
>   are affiliated, you must disclose it or arrange for that
>   organization to disclose it.

While I like the words, I'll note that we have now about doubled the
length from the version we started this thread with.  Remember that
the point was to have it be *very* brief, something that we can
reasonable expect people to read on the screen, and chairs to read
aloud in meetings without its sounding like the disclaimer on a
pharmaceutical advert.  And remember that it's not meant to tell you
everything you need to know, ever -- only to remind you of the
significant point, and to refer you elsewhere for details.

Given that, does the community really want this version?  Does the
community think it will meet those needs, and that it will really work
to be read aloud in roughly 40 sessions a day for five days?