Re: Proposed New Note Well

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 04 January 2016 19:28 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927181A909D; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:28:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.989
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.989 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_HTML_ATTACH=0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8d-YiCtElgXq; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:28:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x229.google.com (mail-pf0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEFBB1A9078; Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:28:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id q63so170652021pfb.0; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:28:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=3zp6KquRKIkOSWj01PiBpSsaZRpXqzupv1+7+B6XSn8=; b=cGLrUQp7CE8UsTiho6O8F+bHt40iSkFbRXWATaTxNNqglaCBJmk8S6+Zw0J6iUQ3aQ JVow4gLlC4ktXairZ1Z+DfDSWSq5RXAqL02zy0sWScbGZ6riOfDvfZIhwKHnotSVKdpA BKN9K2mO/H34MSW9zUlkyxJBqZVbmqdApqmQFdV0a0WqNwBrV+YpZvK1W/pmjq0q555U 9SOcUlC3FuKQzKOp6NzLSC3FnFB5okBtPX2pt84WWx+5p8BYq86Cz6iNHBFlQbOMTw94 qPpPLgTip4Gz4wvEWl4n/Xuq3+HZBQsj6Ln/C1d0L46HabfHbrSGD7t70tMq67vDvf8C hxvg==
X-Received: by 10.98.67.67 with SMTP id q64mr58111881pfa.133.1451935728362; Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:28:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:51d5:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:51d5:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 6sm65178285pfm.46.2016.01.04.11.28.44 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:28:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Proposed New Note Well
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20160104154102.1127.50621.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <568AC7FE.101@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 08:29:02 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160104154102.1127.50621.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------010206090502090508080707"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/crz7qtui6PGGTp-pgIxpEJuoizo>
Cc: iesg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:28:50 -0000

I have some comments. I've also attached a proposed update afterwards.

> Note Well
> 
> This summary

Summary of what? Try:

"This summary of IETF rules"

> does not contain all the details and is only meant to point you in the right direction. Exceptions may apply.

Need a paragraph break here.

> The IETF's patent policy and the definition of an IETF "contribution" are set forth in BCP 79; please read it carefully.
> 
> The brief summary:

Those three words are noise.

> 
> • By participating with the IETF, you agree to follow IETF processes and policies.

"By participating in the IETF..."

> • If you are aware that any contribution to the IETF is covered by patents or patent applications that are owned by, controlled by, or would benefit you or your sponsor, you must disclose that fact, or not participate in the discussion.

Where does "or would benefit" come from in BCP 79? While I agree with the
sentiment, I don't think it follows from our rules, so I think it must
be deleted.

> • As a participant in any IETF activity you acknowledge that written, audio and video records of meetings may be made and may be available to the public, and that recordings of you or your likeness, voice and conduct at the recorded event may be displayed, transmitted, copied, used and promoted in electronic and physical media accessible throughout the world.

Why so much verbiage? What's missing in "available to the public"?

> • Personal information that you provide to IETF will be handled in accordance with the IETF Privacy Statement set.

What set?

> 
> For further information, talk to a chair, ask an Area Director, or review the following:

That's just sloppy. Try

"Definitive information is in the documents listed below. For advice, please
talk to a working group chair or ask an Area Director."

> ​
> BCP 9 (on the Internet Standards Process)

Please be sure to cite http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp9. That's by far the best
form of URL for BCPs.

> ​BCP 25 (on the Working Group processes)
> ​BCP 78 (on copyright in IETF documents)
> ​BCP 79 (on patents covering IETF documents)
> TBD (on IETF Privacy Statement)

Clearly we need that published before updating the Note Well.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter