Re: [kitten] WGLC for three "bis" documents: draft-ietf-kitten-rfc4402bis-00, draft-ietf-kitten-rfc5653bis-01, draft-ietf-kitten-rfc6112bis-00

[Weijun Wang <[e-mail]>]

On 2/5/2015 13:14, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Weijun Wang wrote:
>
>> But the xml2rfc tool claims
>>
>>     No boilerplate text available for ipr: 'full2026'.  Acceptable values are:
>> trust200902, noModificationTrust200902, noDerivativesTrust200902,
>> pre5378Trust200902, trust200811, noModificationTrust200811,
>> noDerivativesTrust200811
>
> The standalone tool for local use, or http://xml2rfc.ietf.org/ ?  I think
> that at least at one point, they had slightly different behavior.

Local, but the web tool also shows the same error. In fact, there is a 
box on the web page explaining several ipr values (4 flavors of 
trust200902) and "pre5378Trust200902" seems to be the correct one since 
the initial RFC for JGSS-API (RFC 2478) was submitted in June 2000.

>
>> I decide to choose "pre5378Trust200902". The output text is almost identical
>> to that of RFC 5653, but adding these lines which I think is harmless
>>
>>         Code Components extracted from this document must
>>     include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
>>     the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
>>     described in the Simplified BSD License.
>
> That may be good enough; we can call out the difference in the shepherd
> report and/or RFC Editor note if needed.

I am waiting for feedback from Greg, and after that I'll post -02 draft.

Thanks
Weijun

>
> -Ben
>