On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 15:24:19 +0200 Simon Josefsson <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Scott Kitterman <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> My suggestion is adopt a rule that code snippets in any RFC MUST include a >> comment to the effect that "This code was derived from IETF RFC XXXX". If >> it's in the code snipppet as a comment to copy/paste virtually everyone will >> copy/paste it. I suspect that those that wouldn't aren't likely to be >> significantly deterred by a license statement. >> >> Once it's a documented requirement and it's on the ID nits checklist, I >> suspect that solves 99% of the problem with no license incompatibility risk. > >Adding a comment like that seems like a good idea, and having it on the >ID nits checklist seems equally useful. So +1. However I don't see any >point in the MUST here. > Agreed, but since some people wanted a legal requirement that such a statement be in the code (much stronger than any IETF MUST), it seems like what would be wanted. Personally, I'd say should is plenty. My main point is that this isn't fundamentally an IPR issue, it's a technical/convenience issue. There are standard ways to deal with such issues without getting lawyers involved. Scott K _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf