Simon,
I wish that is how it would work. The most recent change of the TLP was not following that process -- instead the Trust proposed the change and implemented it after some delay -- and, for example, it resulted in a change to how BSD licensed portions extracted from IETF documents that is not consistent with common practice.
That is correct. One of the things we learned from the discussions around the last TLP changes, was that there was no clear process to follow when the TLP needs to be changed. This proposal is there to fix that.
2c does not seem restricted for non-IETF streams from the writing above. I think it is important that the IETF is notified for issues relating to the IETF stream.
2c says case 1c, 1c deals with all non IETF streams that the Trust manages. (For the last point, please see Olaf's mail.) Henk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.xs4all.nl/~henku P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf