Re: Proposed New Note Well

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 06 April 2016 22:33 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1378112D707 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Apr 2016 15:33:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.03
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.03 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=qti.qualcomm.com
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 Rz12ziRuVidl for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Apr 2016 15:33:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADA9412D1E0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Apr 2016 15:33:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1459982034; x=1491518034; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rAKq55Gl2/LWurwSEm8cR95Lex5dx2P4z3DtFis9g8A=; b=rICQckBXUKBlBAazDamfHlkleYtlFefGhQGrYu19OZHob3z4xxPMdO4K AfdpP7yZjFugfcd3hG3YYH5DRjaUbkAL2yIua6C+GjxpqOL/5a2M1ga51 KD9swrvEr7w44Ve/4m3PprNOLfEu1zhR626Djm0tBuH8Mhfi6Qw/iGtUX Q=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,448,1455004800"; d="scan'208,217";a="183050756"
Received: from unknown (HELO Ironmsg03-L.qualcomm.com) ([10.53.140.110]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 06 Apr 2016 15:33:54 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5700,7163,8127"; a="1125458175"
Received: from nasanexm01f.na.qualcomm.com ([10.85.0.32]) by Ironmsg03-L.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 06 Apr 2016 15:33:54 -0700
Received: from [10.64.130.5] (10.80.80.8) by NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1130.7; Wed, 6 Apr 2016 15:33:53 -0700
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
To: <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed New Note Well
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 19:33:50 -0300
Message-ID: <E5F9AC1D-4FC2-40A7-90A3-DC3913C10D42@qti.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160321165157.31914.47506.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20160321165157.31914.47506.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_E4A0A37C-CB67-496A-A480-5BD00560EE54_="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.4r5239)
X-Originating-IP: [10.80.80.8]
X-ClientProxiedBy: NASANEXM01E.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.31) To NASANEXM01F.na.qualcomm.com (10.85.0.32)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/uygSbL1o9dVZmdFggDR5HTj3JNI>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 06 Apr 2016 22:33:59 -0000

Two things, neither earth-shattering:

1. Jari did say he thought it was still too long. The second paragraph 
(mentioning the patent policy) seems duplicative with what's in the 
second bullet and the list at the bottom. And of course the top-level 
message should be that first bullet: You have to follow all of the 
rules. Let's just strike the second paragraph.

2. In addition to the pointer to the documents at the bottom (which I 
presume will be links when this thing appears in HTML), it would be 
great to have a link to https://www.ietf.org/ombudsteam placed next to 
the line regarding anti-harassment procedures. That'll let people also 
find the IESG Statement and other info.

pr

On 21 Mar 2016, at 13:51, IESG Secretary wrote:

> Note Well
>
> This is a reminder of IETF policies in effect on various topics such 
> as
> patents or code of conduct. It is only meant to point you in the right
> direction. Exceptions may apply.
>
> The IETF's patent policy and the definition of an IETF "contribution"
> and "participation" are set forth in BCP 79; please read it carefully.
>
> As a reminder:
>
> • By participating in the IETF, you agree to follow IETF processes 
> and
>   policies.
> • If you are aware that any IETF contribution is covered by patents 
> or
>   patent applications that are owned or controlled by you or your
>   sponsor, you must disclose that fact, or not participate in the
>   discussion.
> • As a participant in any IETF activity you acknowledge that 
> written,
>   audio and video records of meetings may be made public.
> • Personal information that you provide to IETF will be handled in
>   accordance with the IETF Privacy Statement.
>
> Definitive information is in the documents listed below and other IETF
> BCPs. For advice, please talk to WG chairs or ADs:
> ​
> BCP 9 (Internet Standards Process)
> ​BCP 25 (Working Group processes)
> BCP 25 (Anti-Harassment Procedures)
> BCP 54 (Code of Conduct)
> ​BCP 78 (Copyright)
> ​BCP 79 (Patents, Participation)
> TBD (Privacy)


-- 
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478