Re: [tlp-interest] [admin-discuss] A clerical correction to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions 5.0

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 24 August 2021 06:39 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: tlp-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tlp-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3B1F3A0CD4; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 23:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 umMrqck-y8g9; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 23:39:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C605D3A0CC8; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 23:39:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:1815:5480:b768:b865]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 31BB7600370; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 09:38:56 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1629787137; bh=PVev6SzJ012PrZpTqBJ5abljU3ug8B+A0XkVQHLbwy0=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=flnJw9wCbHpMRFwrgIVvM/1d7truZKl8zs+8GlZpwq6rMCyyjmUTXSIP7rMi3YW1s yE1wf4rBLvbpf4kkxhs3wp7SgTEk17qFTnuPfGNq0in1QBJ0TxwvUY4zm67RHQ4dWY kH6Z8l4HI7k7bKAH/WUkB2sB+o7eve9Cjd7JADug=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <6F54A77A-963F-482A-BB21-A9FFF3167FB1@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7D6B2B46-7012-43EB-ABC6-3CFFD4FB5408"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 09:38:56 +0300
In-Reply-To: <cab44b30-90fe-7abf-1bb4-12ce844f41aa@taugh.com>
Cc: admin-discuss@ietf.org
To: tlp-interest@ietf.org
References: <cab44b30-90fe-7abf-1bb4-12ce844f41aa@taugh.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 31BB7600370.A18BB
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tlp-interest/J_yUHESaaVrVSSb1819hmSWl1GI>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 09:03:19 -0700
Subject: Re: [tlp-interest] [admin-discuss] A clerical correction to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions 5.0
X-BeenThere: tlp-interest@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of proposed revisions to the Trust Legal Provisions <tlp-interest.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tlp-interest>, <mailto:tlp-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tlp-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:tlp-interest@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tlp-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tlp-interest>, <mailto:tlp-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 06:39:22 -0000

Hi,

On 2021-8-24, at 5:18, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> We plan to make clerical corrections to the TLP to change the name to Revised license in all the places where the name occurs, and to change a URL to link to the correct license at opensource.org.  The license itself does not change, only the name used to refer to it.
> 
> This Google doc shows the changes:
> 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FnlAk3gp8AWmwBzwhyr71MC2Jtd8rLYoJ3MVJTggfPw/edit?usp=sharing

I don't see any highlighted changes in that document, and it also still seems to talk about the Simplified BSD License - am I missing something?

> Since this update only corrects a mistake and makes no substantive change to the TLP or the licenses it grants, we plan to post this as a correction rather than as a new version of the TLP.  Once we have done that we also plan to request changes to I-D and RFC boilerplate that use the wrong name, again, with no changes to the licenses themselves.

Would those changes to boilerplate text amount to anything more than replacing "Simplified BSD License" with "Modified BSD license" in the text below?

   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.

Also, is there a plan to do anything about the ~3000 RFCs that were published with this incorrect boilerplate text?

Thanks,
Lars