IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-koster-rep-06.txt> (Robots Exclusion Protocol) to Informational RFC

Martijn Koster <m.koster@greenhills.co.uk> Fri, 11 March 2022 10:23 UTC

Return-Path: <m.koster@greenhills.co.uk>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FAA13A0EED for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Mar 2022 02:23:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.111
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=greenhills.co.uk
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j2mRK37x6yfK for <last-call@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Mar 2022 02:23:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from haggis.mythic-beasts.com (haggis.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:86:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 509C83A0EE4 for <last-call@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Mar 2022 02:23:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=greenhills.co.uk; s=mythic-beasts-k1; h=To:Date:From:Subject; bh=gXhImU2teCsLYaPKkPLj44UvcNKMKcsrYYrvSqeFqqw=; b=nNspcW6DwrVnTP/q9sK87d1Ccg T33UAva4+Wuj25NtsVv1Nar84YfkvUdSd+iAUhm89lo74QjMHadkecdWUV9psyTtu5+Tlbq+jDujv 6oxVMnsR9mxkGT+1FjJ8BS4lBb7axhJiSJBsq7c9NI0N/8VakWz2hwN+uteSP4JttGnCzs+tjXz+F J0wfkiJSBw2ZTmf7DCXJahg7lX6/Ul+5EYOGAq3fyLxJzSd45uP1qAxXGBtuEMy2hfGCsn/5kE0u2 Y9itewwuEGQ/BkRYiaLXyAVWn/My0/dpGiTuySzypdq6vhlxjXfN6nWhGga5YKhQvSyDEPyXKMopJ rTLi7Z1A==;
Received: from [88.97.213.5] (port=57037 helo=smtpclient.apple) by haggis.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from <m.koster@greenhills.co.uk>) id 1nScQi-0007y8-6z; Fri, 11 Mar 2022 10:23:28 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\))
From: Martijn Koster <m.koster@greenhills.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <5DCC145C-D887-4184-B8F5-3C00563C620A@akamai.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 10:23:18 +0000
Cc: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, "henner@google.com" <henner@google.com>, "lizzi@google.com" <lizzi@google.com>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7672C0CA-DED8-45A4-842A-BC5C159DD792@greenhills.co.uk>
References: <20220228222932.825F33844270@ary.qy> <245C65D2-EC38-4C49-9CA0-3DD687CB37DA@mnot.net> <CA+9kkMAnmoJ0n3mPscZvc6kbyOZjQU78vb+iA0Pw5Qq=_kKZEw@mail.gmail.com> <ee8c0615-9207-cf7a-b1a0-905f33062e7a@taugh.com> <CA+9kkMBn-jJbwKjOdOpLL3PFS0REVUBUoSa+2MD0NxnvttHCcg@mail.gmail.com> <91329874-9301-40EC-8155-FBFE55DB89E4@akamai.com> <618c8f70-3d09-fe09-6088-597b2b63655e@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <3efab652-be64-e179-b387-0468a2da9f1c@taugh.com> <5DCC145C-D887-4184-B8F5-3C00563C620A@akamai.com>
To: "garyillyes@google.com" <garyillyes@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.60.0.1.1)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 4
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/ybSj5ARGuUhs3ZJnzHwuIUAoH0M>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-koster-rep-06.txt> (Robots Exclusion Protocol) to Informational RFC
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2022 11:18:49 -0000


> On 9 Mar 2022, at 14:15, Salz, Rich <rsalz@akamai.com> wrote:
> 
>> I don't like to guess, 
> 
> Let's not guess, let's ask the authors directly.  
> 
>> Can someone – probably one of the authors, not Ted – why they feel it is necessary to not allow derivative works?
> 
>> In the past there have been many RFC’s that documented existing cryptographic algorithms: Blake2, ChaCha/Poly, etc. None of them say no derivatives.
> 
> Why do you want no-derived-changes?  Given that the IETF almost never does this, I would expect this to be a hard requirement to justify.

Gary, why was this added? Having looked at the discussion in RFC3667 sections 5.2 and 7.3 it seems that this is appropriate for re-publishing documents from other standard bodies, and to protect proprietary technologies. The robots.txt is based on a long-standing industry practice, defined by a historical specification and de-facto (diverging) implementations, but not a standard body. And the proprietary technology protection doesn’t apply either.
So I agree it should not be there.

— Martijn

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email