% Joe, % % You mention a potential chilling effect an authors if the IETF % maintained an archive of past drafts, but the text in RFC 2026 is pretty % clear. Check the paragraph #1 in section 10.3.1. It says "the % contributor ... grant an unlimited perpetual, non-exclusive, % royalty-free, world-wide right and license to the ISOC and the IETF % under any copyrights in the contribution." Note the words "unlimited % perpetual" -- definitely not "limited to 6 months". % % -- Christian Huitema % % _______________________________________________ me not being Joe. reconciling RFC 2026 language with the then current boilerplate #3 leads to a conundrum. Remember that the ID series and by extention the RFC series was designed to accomodate ideas and information that did not originate in the context of the IETF and for which the IETF did not expect to have any sort of change control or (by extention) any rights to said ideas. (objecting yet again to bits of RFC 2026... beating a dead horse) that said, the language of RFC 2026 was -never- clearly indicated to potential authors of IDs. the potential authors were presented w/ three choices, one of which directly limited ISOC and the IETF to publication as a ID, with the implication that this was only valid for six months. reminds me of the urban development plans in the basement, w/o stairs, in a locked cabinet with the warning "beware lepard". that particular era seems fraught w/ conflicting directions and it would seem to be prudent to recognise the vagrities of conflicting instructions then, and focus on more productive shorter term objectives now. --bill Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise). _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf