Re: Proposed BCP78 Language Changes
"TS Glassey" <tglassey@earthlink.net> Wed, 10 September 2008 23:31 UTC
Return-Path: <ipr-wg-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ipr-wg-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ipr-wg-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FAB63A6921; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:31:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ipr-wg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipr-wg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9503A68E1 for <ipr-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.484
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.114, BAYES_00=-2.599, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
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 w+odBmmk9iW8 for <ipr-wg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE53D3A6921 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Ti/aVdcC0P0EwnLS7KMKdA4k8lbyD5+S3fMZ42EDuIgKR4hwIQlLUl2vF/JkFGSs; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [24.23.176.93] (helo=tsg1) by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <tglassey@earthlink.net>) id 1KdZ9T-0002JH-EC; Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:31:11 -0400
Message-ID: <034c01c9139d$4f11ce50$6401a8c0@tsg1>
From: TS Glassey <tglassey@earthlink.net>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, ipr-wg@ietf.org
References: <014301c91052$fd499370$6401a8c0@tsg1> <48C819C0.1030603@alvestrand.no>
Subject: Re: Proposed BCP78 Language Changes
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:17:05 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
X-ELNK-Trace: 01b7a7e171bdf5911aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec79311ce8252f2056b4f681397f703e8494350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 24.23.176.93
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPR-WG <ipr-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/ipr-wg>
List-Post: <mailto:ipr-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ipr-wg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipr-wg-bounces@ietf.org
If BCP78 fails to properly contractually intake IP into the IETF it doesnt matter what the IESG thinks of it. The point is not to negotiate a contract but to come to a set of words which satisfy the goals of the IETF and the process. That said the IESG's voting in a secret cabal is not acceptable either but that will change soon enough as well as the liability profiles of the participants. As to moving forward the changes I proposed fix what are obvious problems in the contractual structure of the document you are proposing as a standard. The refusal to look at those because you personally dont want to doesnt change the requirement's either. In fact claiming that because there is no consensus for language which implements specific features doesnt make those unnecessary either. I suggest that the IESG would be negligent if they allowed either BC78 or 79 to be advanced or put into service until the entire document and contract is defined. Otherwise they themselves will become liable for the negligence that occurs therein one would think. Todd Glassey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harald Alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no> To: <ipr-wg@ietf.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 12:02 PM Subject: Re: Proposed BCP78 Language Changes > The WG has come to consensus on draft-ietf-ipr-3978-incoming-09 as a > replacement for RFC 3978 and 4748 (the two components of BCP 78). When > this document is published, it will become BCP 78. > > Further proposals for changes to BCP 78 need to be couched as proposals > for changing draft-ietf-ipr-3978-incoming-09, not as proposals for > changes to RFC 3978. > > Harald > > > _______________________________________________ > Ipr-wg mailing list > Ipr-wg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.19/1664 - Release Date: 9/10/2008 6:00 AM _______________________________________________ Ipr-wg mailing list Ipr-wg@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
- Proposed BCP78 Language Changes TS Glassey
- Re: Proposed BCP78 Language Changes Harald Alvestrand
- Re: Proposed BCP78 Language Changes TS Glassey