IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> Mon, 21 February 2005 03:49 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA13460 for <ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Feb 2005 22:49:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1D34vy-0002pV-Qf for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2005 23:12:35 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D345i-0003MZ-7W; Sun, 20 Feb 2005 22:18:34 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D33i9-0006Uh-Oj for ipr-wg@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2005 21:54:13 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA09770 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Feb 2005 21:54:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([213.162.118.85] ident=Debian-exim) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1D344D-0001cb-W9 for ipr-wg@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Feb 2005 22:17:05 -0500
Received: from tyrosine.codon.org.uk ([213.162.118.93]) by cavan.codon.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:RSA_ARCFOUR_MD5:16) (Exim 4.43) id 1D33hk-000711-Ux; Mon, 21 Feb 2005 02:53:56 +0000
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20050221021306.897F122ADB7@newdev.harvard.edu>
References: <20050221021306.897F122ADB7@newdev.harvard.edu>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 02:53:46 +0000
Message-Id: <1108954426.9227.2.camel@tyrosine>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 213.162.118.93
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on cavan.codon.org.uk
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.1 (built Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:06:07 +0200)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on cavan.codon.org.uk)
X-Spam-Score: 1.9 (+)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ipr-wg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-bradner-rfc-extracts-00.txt
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPR-WG <ipr-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ipr-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ipr-wg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipr-wg-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 1.9 (+)
X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sun, 2005-02-20 at 21:13 -0500, Scott Bradner wrote:

> (by the way 
> "there is nothing that guarantee that the IETF will be around forever"
> is a very silly argument - if the ietf were to go away who would complain
> if there were a 1000 things that claimed to be SIP? - whoever it was
> it would not be the ietf so anything by the IETF that said 'don't do
> that' would be far from effective)

Why is this a concern? There is currently nothing preventing 1000
different documents from claiming to define any given standard. It would
make more sense to ensure that only one document can claim to be the
IETF standard for a given protocol. Once that's possible, there's no
harm in allowing standards documents to be modified as much as people
desire.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org


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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email