Simon Josefsson wrote: > Christian de Larrinaga <cdel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> Any chance of adding some words to the effect that RFCs are free both as >> in gratis and in the freedom sense? > > Makes sense, but be careful with words. RFCs aren't free in all freedom > senses, for example you can't even include them in FOSS projects since > RFCs aren't licensed freely enough. Whooops. I wasn't aware of any non-intuitive limits to distribution of newer RFCs as-is. The original waiver The distribution of this memo is unlimited. seems to have been discontinued somewhere around late 2008. (rfc5246 aka TLSv1.2 still carries it). Where is the problem with including (newer) RFCs with implementation source code for distribution? -Martin