Re: Concerns about draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis-05 becoming a Best Current Practice

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Fri, 03 January 2014 09:45 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 A9F3B1ADF66; Fri, 3 Jan 2014 01:45:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.328
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.328 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, T_DKIM_INVALID=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 e3DYo_ASa-lY; Fri, 3 Jan 2014 01:45:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7511C1ADF67; Fri, 3 Jan 2014 01:45:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.153.168]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s039ipXH024636 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 3 Jan 2014 01:45:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1388742303; bh=GZpC200iZs4lOK2bfwW6H5ZaAQ1dA2wyKKKjSDqV8Os=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=iuoTF6ndrKIkk1FuGF6nCPI7WCU5R+yzMLGTYupI35dAKIkgEP31wcwgPM7xyO9bf qQQZMiFjiYRLvnyX1qh46CWcZKdoP9Lu2Vl8RVOsZTy61aU4iX4MF9pIOkPXsQ17qn hgQX5xrLbLWbefMHJYwYw6XnvZdp90pBjyzCZM1o=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1388742303; i=@elandsys.com; bh=GZpC200iZs4lOK2bfwW6H5ZaAQ1dA2wyKKKjSDqV8Os=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=i58lRSbO7qgUPXRS0fHwV+epFjaBgb8mWvz1RDL9S4h4GuN2uBQBfHdq7TpHPsBCu cWKZ7RrMnBvhrU1/WufEFoHkl6Vpt+2gW3odVns8EaVaymZZsRoz5umI096Wq/WU6V hi10FANueGMv1JNYW38TlbTrpAJZyikiAVQPwrns=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140102224801.0b454e28@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2014 23:36:11 -0800
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: Concerns about draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis-05 becoming a Best Current Practice
In-Reply-To: <3574E3F1-F5B4-4218-A834-B94144AC59B3@vigilsec.com>
References: <20131209225636.27148.57076.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0066A55B-A033-4FC9-8C4C-23C1306F6E98@vigilsec.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131230120808.0c0188f0@resistor.net> <3442080B-EFB3-46A8-9581-E9165C8CD1CC@vigilsec.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131231235656.0bc510d8@elandnews.com> <3574E3F1-F5B4-4218-A834-B94144AC59B3@vigilsec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 03 Jan 2014 09:45:13 -0000

Hi Russ,
At 13:43 02-01-2014, Russ Housley wrote:
>This proposed text is an improvement, but I would be much happier 
>with the addition of one word to the first sentence:  ... devise 
>solutions for the global Internet ...

With the above suggestion, the third statement could be as follows:

    3. IETF participants devise solutions for the global Internet that
       meet the needs of diverse technical and operational environments.

>Disclosure of IPR that you know about is personal conduct.
>
> > The Note Well is used to direct people to BCP 79.  A person 
> attending a working group session will be told about the Note 
> Well.  A person subscribing to an IETF mailing list will be sent a 
> pointer to the Note Well.  I suggest leaving it to the Note Well to 
> list the rules as it has not been argued that the Note Well is inadequate.
>
>RFC 3184 included a sentence telling people about the expected 
>conduct regarding IPR disclosure.  I strongly believe that 3184 
>should do the same.

I'll consider this concern as unresolved.  The Area Directors can 
review the comments and recommend how to resolve the concern.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy