FYI - we need to add a receipt tacking method to the document publishing process so that the rights that are being granted back to the submitter are documented somewhere. Think about this - how do you know what rights you got back from a submission? This is important since the IETF's contracts are ever-changing arrays of documents, so how could reasonably speaking anyone keep track of the rights they were supposed to get. Which version of RFC XXXX, RFC YYYY, and RFC ZZZZ were in force at the time of this submission???. With regard to RFC's being used to tune and change IETF process... -------------------------------- Also there is a problem that the IETF is probably not aware of - but when a Contract Component Document is revised it formally needs to say that it replaces the previous version in its opening statement. The problem is that IETF RFC's don't really ever expire and without some specific statement that it was no longer reference and had been formally retired, someone could easily say "I want rev x of Doc 1 and rev y of doc 2" etc. This may sound petty but its about clean up... The problem is that the IETF cannot reasonably refuse to publish under those terms as well, or it would likely face litigation. Something everyone wants to avoid here. That said - seems like it might be a reasonable addition to RFC's that alter any of the ISOC suborganization's they are setup to provide governance for, that they formally have statements that they by their publishing revise and replace the previous version and that those previous terms are now superseded by this new publication. And that set of statements is how the ISOC Board and the other boards below it certify and announce their publication of a new set of Governance Terms and Conditions for the Entity in question. Todd _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf