Re: Last Call: <draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.txt> (Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 09:28 05-10-2011, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
Another reason not to move it is that the boilerplate paragraph
following it says that MAAWG is going to retain their copyright:

   This document may not be modified, and derivative works of it may
   not be created, and it may not be published except as an Internet-
   Draft.

I missed that.  The Abstract mentions that:

  "While not originally written as an Internet Draft, it has been
   contributed to the IETF standards repository in order to make it
   easier to incorporate this material into IETF work."

The "no derivative" clause makes it impossible to incorporate the material in this draft in any IETF work. The restriction is not called out correctly in draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02. I commented previously [1] about this work when it was brought to the MARF WG and asked whether the draft could be resubmitted without any such restrictions as that is, if I am not mistaken, the usual practice for IETF working group work.

I would be grateful if the IESG would read my position as "against" in its determination of consensus.

Regards,
-sm

1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/marf/current/msg01091.html
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]