Re: draft-bradner-rfc-extracts-00.txt

On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 20:09, Scott Bradner wrote:

> I like all of these - can you suggest a generic way to say the above?

Before I try to do that, can you say more specifically what you want 
to prevent or preclude? 

In open source terms, I think you want to prevent forking of IETF specs
outside the context of the IETF. 

Forks are generally not looked upon well in the open source community, 
but, in practice, most changes contributed by external developers 
originate as a personal fork for experimental use by one or more people...

A number of the open source licenses I've found include a requirement 
that people distributing modified versions notify the original licensor 
of the changes.

Would it be sufficient to require that folks wishing to redistribute
non-interoperable derivative works document their changes in the form 
of either a note to a relevant WG or area list or an internet-draft 
submission?  This at least makes them stick a toe into the IETF process..

						- Bill

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg