Re: Sample code (was: Fwd: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-ldpc)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no>]

--On 4. desember 2007 16:22 +0100 Tom Petch <nwnetworks at dial.pipex.com> 
wrote:

> My apologies, I should have been paying closer attention.
>
> What was the conclusion about code in a non-normative appendix?
>
> I am looking at
>  draft-ietf-ipfix-info-15
> which is in the RFC Editor's Queue, so everyone is happy with it:-)  It
> has code in a non-normative appendix, the text generated from it being
> normative.  It is a (sort of) 'MIB Module' defining objects in XML, which
> will obviously be extracted and used in various processors.  Unlike a MIB
> Module, there is no RFC4181 statement in the XML module, no IP statement
> at all.
>
> Does this appendix still have the same IP rights and releases that code
> in a normative part of the document, eg a MIB module, would have?  As far
> as I can tell, the whole document is the contribution of the same set of
> authors, although a non author turned the XML into the text.

Yes, the IPR rules don't make a distinction between "normative" and 
"non-normative".
4181 doesn't say anything about XML documents, so having no IP statement is 
permissible. The "default IPR rules" apply.

           Harald

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