--On Thursday, September 13, 2012 23:59 + John Levine
jo...@taugh.com wrote:
Censorship? Sheesh.
...
As I think I've said several times before, if we think the
IESG would start gratuitously deleting stuff, we have much
worse problems than any policy statement could solve.
+1
Exactly.
On 9/13/2012 8:40 PM, John Levine wrote:
I'm not sure I understand this analogy. Are you saying that there are
IPR issues related to making expired drafts available?
Yes. Depends on the IDs, when they were authored, and which version of
the boilerplate they contain.
Can you give a concrete
On 9/13/2012 9:23 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
There were times when there were no rights granted explicitly, at
least. I indicated the three ranges in a previous mail.
Joe
On 9/13/2012 8:40 PM, John Levine wrote:
I'm not sure I understand this analogy. Are you saying that there are
IPR issues
On 9/13/2012 10:35 PM, Joe Touch wrote:
Note well, as you noted well, does not go back to the beginning of all
IDs.
I.e., this is a tangled mess of different copyrights, different note
wells, etc., and it's not as simple as it's the IETF's right to do
anything except - maybe - going forward
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 07:24:12AM -0700, tglassey wrote:
For instance - how do you deal with an ID which was originally
published under one set of IP rights and another later one - or a
derivative work which is published under a separate set of rights -
which functionally contravenes or
I don't think that the Note Well note has much to do with what Joe started
talking about
we have had this discussion before
quite a few years ago (pre tools) I suggested moving expired IDs to an
expired IDs directory
rather than removing them from the IETF public repository as well as posting
At 11:44 14-09-2012, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Prefer Header for HTTP'
draft-snell-http-prefer-14.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final
Russ has asked that SM and I pare down the proposal for a 3777 update,
back down to my original one that just adds the IAOC and the
ex-officio roles to the exclusion list. After talking with SM, I have
re-posted a slightly edited version of that original proposal (below),
and we have decided that
The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Kerberos Options for DHCPv6'
(draft-sakane-dhc-dhcpv6-kdc-option-18.txt) as Proposed Standard
This document is the product of the Kerberos Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Stephen Farrell and Sean Turner.
A URL of this Internet Draft
Minutes of the IETF/IEEE 802 leadership meeting held in Milpitas, CA on July
25, 2012 have now been posted:
http://www.iab.org/documents/minutes/minutes-2012/iab-minutes-2012-07-25/
OPSEC, SIDR and V6OPS Interim Meeting
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
29 September 2012
Venue: Hotel Okura Amsterdam (www.okura.nl)
Ferdinand Bolstraat 333
1072 LH Amsterdam
The Netherlands
1. Registration
2. Accommodations
3. Meeting Schedule
1. Registration
A. Fee:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Prefer Header for HTTP'
draft-snell-http-prefer-14.txt as Proposed Standard
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 6709
Title: Design Considerations for Protocol Extensions
Author: B. Carpenter, B. Aboba, Ed.,
S. Cheshire
Status: Informational
Stream:
13 matches
Mail list logo
