Re: archives (was The other parts of the report....

% Joe,
% 
% You mention a potential chilling effect an authors if the IETF
% maintained an archive of past drafts, but the text in RFC 2026 is pretty
% clear. Check the paragraph #1 in section 10.3.1. It says "the
% contributor ... grant an unlimited perpetual, non-exclusive,
% royalty-free, world-wide right and license to the ISOC and the IETF
% under any copyrights in the contribution." Note the words "unlimited
% perpetual" -- definitely not "limited to 6 months". 
% 
% -- Christian Huitema 
% 
% _______________________________________________

me not being Joe.

	reconciling RFC 2026 language with the then current 
	boilerplate #3 leads to a conundrum.  Remember that the
	ID series and by extention the RFC series was designed
	to accomodate ideas and information that did not originate
	in the context of the IETF and for which the IETF did not
	expect to have any sort of change control or (by extention)
	any rights to said ideas. (objecting yet again to bits of
	RFC 2026... beating a dead horse)

	that said, the language of RFC 2026 was -never- clearly
	indicated to potential authors of IDs. the potential authors
	were presented w/ three choices, one of which directly 
	limited ISOC and the IETF to publication as a ID, with the
	implication that this was only valid for six months.

	reminds me of the urban development plans in the basement,
	w/o stairs, in a locked cabinet with the warning "beware lepard".

	that particular era seems fraught w/ conflicting directions
	and it would seem to be prudent to recognise the vagrities
	of conflicting instructions then, and focus on more productive
	shorter term objectives now.  

--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf