RE: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-04

["MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Spencer wrote:

If you folks can contact the original authors and ask if they have any objections to use of the updated copyright boilerplate now, that may come in handy the next time IPPM needs to update 2330.

 

If you can't, it's probably best to update the copyright disclaimer now.

 

[acm] I updated the disclaimer in the working version.

I think there are a few more editorial comments to resolve.

Al

 

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF [mailto:spencerdawkins.ietf@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 1:20 PM
To: Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; gen-art@xxxxxxxx; ippm@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6.all@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-04

 

Hi, draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6.all,

 

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 2:43 AM, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> [acm]
> We can add the pre-5378 disclaimer as a catch-all, but I doubt the original
> authors would make any fuss about the small amount of common text with
> 2330.
> Almes, Paxson, Mahdavi and Mathis are all gentlemen and the best of their
> time.
>

I'm sure they are :) Just relaying what the id-nits told me.

 

If I might make an observation - the discontinuity between pre-5379 and post-5370 copyright grants isn't going to get better (until all pre-5370 RFCs are Historic), and we already have some running code from pre-5370 RFC authors becoming unreachable (in extreme cases, because they died).

 

If you folks can contact the original authors and ask if they have any objections to use of the updated copyright boilerplate now, that may come in handy the next time IPPM needs to update 2330. 

 

If you can't, it's probably best to update the copyright disclaimer now.

 

Thanks!

 

Spencer