Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: The IETF Trustees invite your comments on ...

Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com> Thu, 29 January 2009 06:59 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 [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C413A691D; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:59:12 -0800 (PST)
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 1752E3A691D for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:59:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.538
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.061, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 GDBV9rodNVqg for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:59:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nylon.softarmor.com (nylon.softarmor.com [66.135.38.164]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FBFD3A68F1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:59:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.102] (cpe-72-181-150-177.tx.res.rr.com [72.181.150.177] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nylon.softarmor.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n0T6wmCg025706 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:58:50 -0600
Message-Id: <EF8706F0-F195-4629-A31B-6A25D6E46EB5@softarmor.com>
From: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <p06240814c5a109bd52c0@[165.227.249.206]>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: The IETF Trustees invite your comments on ...
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:58:43 -0600
References: <20090124154913.53426.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <B5720E65D2354F659809CA433C4D0C59@DGBP7M81> <p06240814c5a109bd52c0@[165.227.249.206]>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
Cc: 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On Jan 24, 2009, at 12:11 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> At 10:39 AM -0700 1/24/09, Doug Ewell wrote:
>> John Levine <johnl at iecc dot com> wrote:
>>
>>> Nonetheless, I can't help but seeing angels dancing on pins here.  
>>> We're worrying about situations in which someone contributes  
>>> material to the IETF that ended up in an RFC, then later goes to  
>>> court and claims to be shocked and injured that someone else used  
>>> his material in ways that RFCs are routinely used, i.e., someone  
>>> acts like a complete jerk.
>>
>> It could happen.  Remember that some people who participate in a  
>> WG, and contribute one or two bits of information that make their  
>> way into the RFC, are unhappy overall with that group's rough  
>> consensus.  Not all "contributions" are positive or direct; an  
>> author might add wording specifically to ward off a rogue  
>> interpretation that someone in the WG "contributed."  If you think  
>> this is improbable, read some of the appeals that the IESG has had  
>> to address in the past 3 years or so.
>
> You are missing John's point, which you elided below the quote  
> above. If someone is a jerk and irrationally aggrieved, nothing we  
> say in a boilerplate will prevent them from suing the IETF and  
> incurring great costs in time and money. A very very careful  
> boilerplate *might* cause them to be less likely to win damages, but  
> balancing that against the time and effort we put into the  
> boilerplate is literally impossible to do.

The real risk is where some other SDO can hold IETF liable for damages  
induced by the irrational aggrievement of someone who contributed to  
the IETF. While we can't do much about the irrational contributor, we  
can at least avoid making express commitments to indemnify third  
parties who use our pre-5378-note-well specifications. This puts the  
conflict between the irrationally aggrieved party and the third party,  
leaving the IETF out of the shooting, which is a Good Thing.

--
Dean

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