Re: Summary of revised Last Call on draft-ietf-ipr-rules-update

[Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no>]

Simon,

since you obviously have the documents in front of you:

can you quote the exact sentences in -trust-update you object to on this 
basis and the corresponding pieces of 3978, and send them to the list?

I remember some pieces of text where "IETF" really didn't make sense, 
but can't remember whether or not those were the ones that got changed.

Standard rant: If a message goes out with "Last Call" in the title and 
"B - Go forward with draft-ietf-ipr-ietf-trust-update-00" as one of its 
options, I have a hard time understanding that you claim that we haven't 
made a Last Call on the document....

                Harald

Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no> writes:
>
>   
> > Based on this tally, the chairs will send
> > draft-ietf-ipr-ietf-trust-update-00 to the IESG for Last Call and
> > approval.
> >     
>
> I wish we could have a WGLC on the actual document first, though, but
> maybe there is no time.  In any case, here are my comments on the
> document.  If there is no time to address this before the Last Call,
> I'll send them again later.
>
> The document seems to go beyond changing "ISOC" into "IETF Trust",
> which was what one of the chairs indicated earlier:
>
> "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb at cs.columbia.edu> writes:
>
>   
> > If the WG is unhappy with this draft, we will proceed with
> > draft-ietf-ipr-ietf-trust-update-00.txt instead, a draft that changes
> > nothing but the ISOC->Trust text.
> >     
>
> Specifically, the document also changes "IETF" to "IETF Trust" in
> several places.  The definition of IETF is:
>
>    a. "IETF":  In the context of this document, the IETF includes all
>       individuals who participate in meetings, working groups, mailing
>       lists, functions and other activities which are organized or
>       initiated by ISOC, the IESG or the IAB under the general
>       designation of the Internet Engineering Task Force or IETF, but
>       solely to the extent of such participation.
>
> The "IETF" is not the same as the "IETF Trust".  Changing the former
> to the latter in the legalese modifies the rights granted directly to
> IETF participants.
>
> Those changes seems unwarranted and unrelated -- as far as I
> understood, the urgency is that RFC 3978 no longer should refer to
> ISOC, but instead reference the IETF Trust.
>
> Specifically, the urgency was _not_ that the references to "IETF" was
> problematic, so I believe we should not remove, in several places,
> that term in the document, but defer that change to other IPR WG
> decisions.
>
> Therefor, I request that draft-ietf-ipr-ietf-trust-update should be
> updated to only change "ISOC" and "Internet Society" to "IETF Trust".
> Do not also change "IETF" into "IETF Trust".
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
>
>   


_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg