RE: [Trustees] [IAB] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 24 June 2009 13:57 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
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 6B6A028C4B0; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.57
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.57 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.029, 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 fXUf80SMX0Je; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7990528C466; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1MJSxT-0002d8-3b; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:56:15 -0400
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:56:14 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: "Contreras, Jorge" <Jorge.Contreras@wilmerhale.com>, Marshall Eubanks <tme@americafree.tv>, ietf list <ietf@ietf.org>, IAB IAB <iab@iab.org>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [Trustees] [IAB] Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)
Message-ID: <CACDAC0D861050DA6EA21CD9@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <50E312B117033946BA23AA102C8134C6037E20F6@SDCPEXCCL2MX.wilmerhale.com>
References: <B7008260-2BA6-4529-B4F6-1D0D3D9E7AEA@americafree.tv> <B64675549AE28D6D578CC911@PST.JCK.COM> <50E312B117033946BA23AA102C8134C6037E20F6@SDCPEXCCL2MX.wilmerhale.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: Trustees <trustees@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-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: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:57:45 -0000

--On Tuesday, June 23, 2009 17:04 -0400 "Contreras, Jorge"
<Jorge.Contreras@wilmerhale.com> wrote:

>  
>> The statement in 2.b, in conjunction with a July 2009
>> Effective Date (see the top of the document), leaves
>> documents published between the presumptive Effective Date of
>> the procedures in effect today and that date in a strange
>> sort of never-never land, since 2.b doesn't mention 5378.
> 
> The Feb. 15 version of the TLP is currently in effect.
> Documents published between Feb. 15 and the effectiveness of
> the revised TLP will continue to be governed by the Feb. 15
> TLP.  There should be no gap in coverage.

I agree.  But that isn't what the document appears to say --
either to me or to an attorney friend to whom I showed it
yesterday (we were meeting about something else entirely, and
not in his lawyer capacity, but it seemed like an opportunity
for some quick calibration of whether my seeing the apparent
ambiguity was just my lack of legal training).

>> I can only infer from this that the Trustees did not do a
>> careful review of the proposed new procedures in toto.  
> 
> That is not true.

Glad to hear it.

    john