Re: Proposed IESG statement on referencing documents behind a paywall

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

Suresh Krishnan <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > In the past we have dealt with a few drafts that have had normative
    > references to paywalled documents and we have dealt with them on a
    > case-by-case basis (usually during or after IETF last call). In order
    > to get the working groups involved earlier in the process, the IESG is
    > working on issuing a statement on how to deal with such drafts and we
    > would greatly appreciate input from WG chairs on this topic. This is
    > the proposed text of the statement

Thank you for taking this on.
I hope that this means that the open-stand.org effort will also get rebooted,
although I recognize that's more an ISOC/LLC thing.

    > 1. The WG MUST be explicitly informed of any such normative reference
    > and the WG MUST reach consensus that it is acceptable. The
    > document shepherd MUST include this information in the shepherd
    > writeup.

I find this acceptable first step of the process.

I'm not sure what the WG should do when I say
  "Please take this work out of the IETF if I can't implement
   or validate an implementation without document FOO"

And, btw, I don't consider a non-paywall with some https://tosdr.org/
click through.  I want a URL for the document. When I click on it, I get the
document.  When I put a #foobar on the URL, I can reference a section of it,
and when I copy and paste from it into an email, I'm not violating their
copyright.

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-