Re: Draft IESG Statement on Removal of an Internet-Draft from the IETF Web Site

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

 



Hi John,
At 09:49 20-09-2012, John C Klensin wrote:
post-expiration.  I think that, as a community, we ought to
respect those assumptions more than saying, effectively, "we are
going to maintain a public archive no matter what commitments
you thought were made to you because we can and because we don't
think you will actually sue us".  The latter is just bad for the
community, whether it "works" or not.

In a past century there was a discussion about maintaining a public archive of expired I-Ds. There is a striking difference in the arguments; there wasn't much discussion about the legal side. Nowadays an individual has to hire a practicing lawyer from the state of Virginia before making any contribution.

It was also argued that the IETF would need a policy to decide on whether to turn I-Ds into an archival series. IENs and RFCs where mentioned. In those ancient times the question was also about distribution instead of publication. It was also pointed out that it was better not to perpetuate bad ideas. There wasn't any mention of the social contract. At a guess it was probably because everything was not a matter of "rights" or legal issues. Or it might be that social contracts were part of the obvious.

A sift of long disagreements might show that the sensible "opposing" argument is often missed because of the sugarcoating. A dismissive attitude might also have something to do with that.

Consensus is when no man or woman is left standing on the battlefield.

Regards,
-sm


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