Joel M. Halpern wrote:
I believe that the simple answer is "yes", as long as one understands what is happening. There is an IRTF RFC. It grants all rights to anyone to make derivative works, modify, etc. Then, one of the derivative works is the IETF I-D and eventual RFC. Even if there is no change in text (almost unheard of), it is a different work, and that work has the more restrictive rights for derivation. Yes, we would have to understand that anyone could go back to the IRTF RFC and do anything they want with that text. Those rights can not (and should not) be revoked.cannot be contractually revoked is the operative phrase - nothing else is relevant. The same is true of any old versions of RFC's. There is nothing in the IETF's process which forces adopters to keep their technology current to released standards which is something that has caused a number of things in the real world including security holes in products being allowed to remain.
Seriously - once an "IETF Technology Grant to the Public" is made which is what the publication under the existing terms are, that granted work cannot be revoked or changed in any way - even deprecating a RFC or Standard Document for a new version or RFC may stop people from working on those old documents in the IETF but in the real world are meaningless based solely on the licensing the IETF made available.
There is another issue I want to add to this and that is when data in associated mailing lists from Work Group List Sponsors strays into IETF work under Note Well, those IP's should also be part of the IETF evidence archive for each and every standards run. Entities who sponsor IETF WG Lists in many instances also sponsor their own development lists which then feed pre-vetted content into the IETF Standards process but without these ancillary communications it is impossible to see what that vetting is.
That said we need a special rule for "IETF Mailing List Sponsors which states that any mailing lists they operate under the provision as a trustee for holding evidence of the IETF's standards development process, must provide that material with the archives of the IETF Mailing List they manage for the IETF's WGs. Also those digital content streams must be kept safe from alteration and editing by cryptographically signing them with a set of tools built for maintaining IETF lists."
And of course we will need a WG to build that tool set Todd
Yours, Joel Scott Brim wrote:What happens when an IRTF document becomes polished enough that it is adopted by the IETF and put on standards track? If the text is already published under one rights regime, can the IETF then apply more restrictive conditions? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Ipr-wg mailing list Ipr-wg at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg_______________________________________________ Ipr-wg mailing list Ipr-wg at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.58/2305 - Release Date: 08/15/09 18:10:00