[tlp-interest] Boilerplate changes Required for TLP 4.0

[Marshall Eubanks <[e-mail]>]

Colleagues,

Some concerns have been raised about tooling issues and boilerplate  
changes. At present, for example, xml2rfc is not supported, and  
because of this it is not clear when it will be possible to update it  
to support the new boilerplate.  However, Alternate Stream documents  
have been blocked for some time waiting for the new Trust Legal  
Provisions (TLP), and it was decided to unblock these documents with  
TLP 4.0 even in the absence of xml2rfc support. (There is an open call  
for volunteers to support xml2rfc, and I would encourage interested  
parties to contact Russ Housley.)

     The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL
     NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and
     "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
     RFC 2119.

If for any reason the tool of your choice has not been upgraded by the  
end of the grace period on February 1 then the following two minor  
changes need to be made to Internet-Draft boilerplates before  
submission. Note that the changes are different for IETF Stream and  
for Alternate Stream Documents. The changes for the IETF stream are  
editorial (as noted by a SHOULD in the text below) and drafts produced  
by the current tools for that stream are therefore compliant with TLP  
4.0.  The changes for the other streams are required (as noted by a  
MUST in the text below).

-----

For IETF Stream Documents the following changes SHOULD be made :

Change 1 :
OLD:
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the  
provisions of BCP 78 and
BCP 79.

NEW:
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the  
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

EXPLANATION:
Dropped the words "to IETF" as there is some ambiguity with respect to  
Internet drafts that are not submitted to be published as IETF Stream  
RFCs.

Change 2 :

Second : Different Treatment for IETF and non-IETF stream documents  
regarding potential BSD licenses for code components.

OLD:
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 BSD  
License.

NEW:
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.

EXPLANATION: Introduction of the word "Simplified" at the second use  
of "BSD License" for clarity.

-----

For Alternate Stream Documents the following changes MUST be made

Change 1 :
OLD:
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the  
provisions of BCP 78 and
BCP 79.

NEW:
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the  
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

EXPLANATION:
Dropped the words "to IETF" as there is some ambiguity with respect to  
Internet drafts that are not submitted to be published as IETF Stream  
RFCs.

Change 2 :

OLD:
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 BSD  
License.

NEW: This sentence must not be included (note that this text MUST NOT  
be inserted in the document).

EXPLANATION: The BSD license is not available for code components from  
Alternate Stream documents.

Regards
Marshall Eubanks