On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 08:12:17 -0800 Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >At Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:49:09 +1300, >Brian E Carpenter wrote: >At Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:49:09 +1300, >Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> >> On 2008-12-13 08:20, Russ Housley wrote: >> > At 01:28 PM 12/12/2008, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> > >> >> As far as I understand, I can no longer take RFC 4398, fix some >> >> minor problem, and re-submit it as a RFC 4398bis. Even though I was >> >> editor of RFC 4398. The reason is that some material in that document >> >> was written by others. At least, I cannot do this, without getting >> >> permission from the other people who wrote the initial document. I wish >> >> this is mistaken and that someone can explain how to reconcile this >> >> example with what Russ wrote. >> > >> > Correct. RFC 5378 imposes this burden on the contributor. All of the >> > rights needed to make updates to the document within the IETF Standards >> > Process are clearly already available, but the contributor is required >> > to obtain the additional rights that are required by RFC 5378. >> >> Formally yes. But the Trust can take the sting out of this by >> a vigorous effort to get former contributors to sign over the >> necessary rights, and by providing a convenient method for >> this to be done. > >Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how this helps, because >we have no tracking of all the contributors to those previous >documents. So, how can the contributor know that all forme >contributors have executed those additional rights grants? Additionally, I think the major problem isn't with active contributors, but with people who are inactive/unreachable. Scott K _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf