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]

 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Levine
> Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 1:19 PM
> To: ietf@xxxxxxxx
> Cc: sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-jdfalk-maawg-cfblbcp-02.txt> (Complaint Feedback Loop Operational Recommendations) to Informational RFC
> 
> >The "no derivative" clause makes it impossible to incorporate the
> >material in this draft in any IETF work.
> 
> Section 3.3 of RFC 5378, on derivative works says:
> 
>    There are two exceptions to this requirement: documents
>    describing proprietary technologies and documents that are
>    republications of the work of other standards organizations.
> 
> It looks to me like the latter clause applies here. RFC 5744 has
> similar language specifically for the Independent stream.

Concur.  I'm in support of publication, as well as the "enough with the nitpicking already" sentiment.

-MSK
_______________________________________________
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]