no correction needed - remember that when 2026 was approved most SDOs (e.g., the ITU-T) did not make their standards available for free so that had to be part of the world the IETF lived in fwiw - I think that ANSI X3.4-1986 (the standard used as an example in RC 2026) was not available for free at that point Scott > On Oct 16, 2021, at 8:13 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 17-Oct-21 12:49, Michael Richardson wrote: >> >> Joel M. Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Just make a copy might work if we have the legal right to do so. (There are >>> other complications, but they pale beside this one. In the case of IEEE >>> specs that Michael Richardson has been talking about, we do NOT have a right >>> to make a copy and give it away.) >> >> For anything that has an archive.org copy, we could use that. >> >> IEEE makes ure that archive.org can't archive their stuff. >> > > If I have this right (and Scott Bradner will probably correct me if > I'm wrong), the basic rules in RFC2026 section 7.1.1 recognize the reality > that some open standards are essential and unavoidable references which > are not available free of charge to the general public. > > To be clear, the phrase "open standard" in that section doesn't > mean "free of charge". (Long essay on what it *does* mean elided.) > > (IEEE 802 and numerous CCITT Recommendations were the original > problem cases, I think, and that was about hard copies, of course.) > > Wherever possible we try to avoid dependency on such references, but > when you can't, there really isn't any choice. > > Brian >
