Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: The IETF Trustees invite your review and comments on a proposed Work-Around to the Pre-5378 Problem

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Fri, 09 January 2009 14:32 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 013B528C15D; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:32:48 -0800 (PST)
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 BB9923A69AA; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:32:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.022
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.022 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.577, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 XsFztc6iUboZ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:32:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com (e2.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.142]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45D693A67CF; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 06:32:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e2.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n09EVDvb021738; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:31:13 -0500
Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v9.1) with ESMTP id n09EWUhV018984; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:32:30 -0500
Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n09EWTRu009269; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:32:30 -0500
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-234-4.mts.ibm.com [9.65.234.4]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n09EWSUu009130 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:32:29 -0500
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.2/8.12.5) with ESMTP id n09EWPuR023227; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:32:25 -0500
Message-Id: <200901091432.n09EWPuR023227@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: Ed Juskevicius <edj.etc@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: The IETF Trustees invite your review and comments on a proposed Work-Around to the Pre-5378 Problem
In-reply-to: <70873A2B7F744826B0507D4B84903E60@noisy>
References: <70873A2B7F744826B0507D4B84903E60@noisy>
Comments: In-reply-to "Ed Juskevicius" <edj.etc@gmail.com> message dated "Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:43:50 -0500."
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:32:25 -0500
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Cc: 'Trustees' <trustees@ietf.org>, wgchairs@ietf.org, 'IETF Discussion' <ietf@ietf.org>, iab@iab.org, iesg@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.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-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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

"Ed Juskevicius" <edj.etc@gmail.com> writes:

> The new legend text, if implemented, would do the following:

>   a. Provide Authors and Contributors with a way to identify (to the
>      IETF Trust) that their contributions contain material from pre-5378  
>      documents for which RFC 5378 rights to modify the material outside
>      the IETF standards process may not have been granted, and

One thing that I don't recall being mentioned explicitely is that any
such clause (IMO) needs to make clear which contributers are granting
full 5378 rights, and which are not. What I mean is that all *current*
contributers (i.e., those involved in the editing the *current*
version of the document) need to make clear that their *new*
contribution *is* covered by 5378. That is, we do not want existance
of pre-5378 text to allow a current contributer to continue to operate
under the pre-5378 rules. It is only the pre-existing text that is
covered by the older rules. Presumably, if at some future time we can
get proper rights from all previous contributers, the document should
then be covered in full by 5378.

Looking at the updated draft legal provisions, this aspect needs a
little bit more clarification, IMO. (I'd be happy to comment further
offline if that is not clear.)

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