IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-polk-ipr-disclosure

Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im> Tue, 22 May 2012 18:57 UTC

Return-Path: <stpeter@stpeter.im>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3189121F85E5; Tue, 22 May 2012 11:57:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.58
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.58 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ikq4B44gSc3H; Tue, 22 May 2012 11:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stpeter.im (mailhost.stpeter.im [207.210.219.225]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EAB221F85AC; Tue, 22 May 2012 11:57:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [64.101.72.115] (unknown [64.101.72.115]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by stpeter.im (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 23214400A4; Tue, 22 May 2012 13:14:01 -0600 (MDT)
Message-ID: <4FBBE1B5.4080903@stpeter.im>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 12:57:57 -0600
From: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
References: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392812C31D@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com>
In-Reply-To: <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E00392812C31D@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "draft-polk-ipr-disclosure.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-polk-ipr-disclosure.all@tools.ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-polk-ipr-disclosure
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 18:57:59 -0000

On 5/22/12 12:51 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as an Informational RFC,
> though I have a question about that proposed status.
> 
> Major Issues:
> 
> 1. Should this not be a BCP?

Hi Murray,

That's a good question. Tim and I intend this document as a set of
informal guidelines and suggestions that folks might consider using.
It's possible that those guidelines and suggestions might prove useful,
but at this stage I don't think they rise to the level of best current
practices.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email