[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New ID-Checklist to replace ID-nits (fwd)
Magnus, Harald, Scott, Bert
(I'm adding Scott and Bert - don't know if you are following this list)
I think the point you're making below is a good one Magnus, and if we
could agree on how this should be done and get it written out it'd
be excellent:
On Monday, 24 May 2004, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> One question concerning your boilerplate. Shouldn't your status of this
> memo section include the following paragraph?
>
> "By submitting this Internet-Draft, I (we) accept the provisions of
> Section 3 of RFC 3667 (BCP 78)."
As 3667 is written, you are deemed to agree to section 3.3 just by
submitting a draft - 3667 doesn't require you to acknowledge this.
BUT - since the boilerplate used by drafts in general is the most
immediately obvious pointer that readers and other authors have to
what applies, I think it would be good to include a paragraph with
this kind of acknowledgement. On my part, I'd have expressed it as
a second paragraph, appearing after the initial 3667 Section 5.1
acknowledgement, or possibly as the first paragraph before the 3667(5.1)
ack.:
"Submission of this draft is done with the understanding that the
terms and conditions in Section 3.3 of RFC 3667 apply, and each
contributor affirm that the items in Section 3.4 of RFC 3667 apply
to his or her contribution, to the best of his or her knowledge and
ability."
However this is maybe too longwinded - maybe a simple rephrasing of
the opening paragraph used up till now would be better:
"This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of RFC3667."
Scott? Bert?
> I am a bit confused that section 3 of RFC 3667 is for all drafts, why
> the text actually saying that they may be included is listed as "Notices
> and Rights Required in RFC Editor Contributions".
>
> Shouldn't the above statement be always included except if the
> alternative one is included. Could I not otherwise claim that I am in
> fact not granting the IETF and ISOC the rights that are listed in
> section 3 of RFC 3667?
>
> Clarification on this is highly appreciated.
Agree. As for the following, I think it might also be a good
idea, although I don't know if it belongs in the ID-checklist
or in a separate document...
Henrik
> Second, I thing that bullet 1 of section 2.2 of the ID-Checklist:
>
> "1. Internet Draft boilerplate
>
> It MUST contain boilerplate that permits publication as an RFC, see
> [RFC3667], Section 5.2."
>
> Is rather insufficient and even erroneous for the job. I think one
> should have proper walk through here of the different elements needed in
> the "Status of this memo" section. To my understanding this consists of
> several different pieces:
>
> A. The RFC 3668 IPR statement.
>
> B. Possibly the RFC 3667 statements in Section 6.
>
> C. Possibly limitation to copyright and publishing rights, according to
> section 5.2 of RFC 3667.
>
> D. The "Internet draft" name disclaimer statement:
>
> "Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
> Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups
> may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
>
> Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
> and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
> time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
> material or to cite them other than as "work in progress"."
>
> E. Pointer to current IDs and shadow directories:
>
> >
> > The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
> > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt .
> >
> > The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
> > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html .
>
>
> Further I have also included in some draft included either of the
> following statements, to clearly indicate the document status. However I
> have now idea where I have got these from. However I think they are
> beneficial.
>
> 1. "This document is an individual submission to the IETF. Comments
> should be directed to the authors."
>
> 2. "This document is a submission of the IETF [#WG name] WG. Comments
> should be directed to the [#WG name] WG mailing list, ### at ietf.org."
>
>
> How to build the previous "Status of this memo" section was previous
> indicated in the ID guideline:
> http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt
>
> I think a similar page is needed also for the new text, and the old one
> should be removed, because currently there are contradicting guidelines.
>
> Cheers
>
> Magnus
>
>
> Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Draft Boilerplate conformant with RFC 3667 and 3668
> > ===================================================
> >
> >
> > DRAFT INTRO:
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Status of this Memo
> >
> > By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
> > patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
> > and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
> > RFC 3668.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
> > Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
> > other groups may also distribute working documents as
> > Internet-Drafts.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
> > and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
> > time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
> > material or to cite them other than as "work in progress".
> >
> > The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
> > http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt .
> >
> > The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
> > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html .
> >
> > This Internet-Draft will expire on ....................
> >
> > Copyright Notice
> >
> > Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > DRAFT ENDING:
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Intellectual Property Statement
> >
> > The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
> > Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
> > pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
> > this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
> > might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
> > made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
> > on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
> > found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
> >
> > Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
> > assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
> > attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
> > such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
> > specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
> > http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
> >
> > The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
> > copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
> > rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
> > this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
> > ietf-ipr at ietf.org.
> >
> >
> > Disclaimer of Validity
> >
> > This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
> > "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
> > OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
> > ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
> > INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
> > INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
> > WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
> >
> >
> > Copyright Statement
> >
> > Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject
> > to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
> > except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
> >
> >
> > Acknowledgment
> >
> > Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
> > Internet Society.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
Henrik
--
Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.