[rfc-i] End of Last Call on draft-braden-independent-submission-01.txt
braden at ISI.EDU
Wed Oct 14 11:50:48 PDT 2009
The last call period of 30 days for draft-braden-independent-submission
expires today. The only significant issue that was raised with this
document was an unclear sentence regarding the rights on enclosed code.
The document was updated from -00 to -01 with this one sentence amended.
Following the plan announced in the appended message, as the acting
Independent Submissions Editor, I am submitting the -01 draft tto the
RFC Editor for publication. We expect that the Trust will announce
agreement with the IPR policy in this draft, at which point the RFC
Editor will be able to publish the backlog of Independent Submissions.
Bob Braden wrote:
> RFC publication in the Independent Stream has been suspended for quite
> a long time, pending resolution of the copyright issues that are
> Really, the copyright issues for the Independent Stream were settled
> more than 2 years ago, in July 2007, by RFC 4846. Section 8 of that
> document defined the Stream's copyright rules in lawyerly language.
> What has been missing is the mechanism to enforce those rules,
> considering the role of the Trust and its incoming/outgoing rights model.
> Now, it is very easy to get lost in many Twisty Little Passages on
> this topic, and we did repeatedly. At the last IETF meeting, there
> were numerous meetings and hallway discussions. Members of the RFC
> Editor staff and of the RFC Editorial Board participated in many of
> these discussions. The IAB Chair finally led us towards light, saying
> "it is really very simple..."
> The bottom line is that we believe that nearly all the pieces are in
> place. The major missing pieces are actions/agreements that the Trust
> needs to make for outgoing rights on Independent Submissions. A
> request must be made to the Trust, and this request must have
> community consensus.
> Joel Halpern and I therefore put together
> draft-braden-independent-submission-00.txt for discussion.
> According to recent precedent, it seems that a 30 day Last Call is
> required. Hopefully, consensus will be reached, and it can be
> published as an Informational RFC in the Independent Stream. Please
> note that (we believe that) this document is completely consistent
> with Section 8 of RFC 4846.
> The next issue is the venue for discussion of this draft. Since the
> "community" served by the Independent Submission stream is potentially
> a superset of the standards-setting body called the "IETF", the IETF
> list did not seem to be an appropriate venue. Rather, the rfc-interest
> list seems to be the most appropriate place for this Last Call
> We are therefore declaring a 30 day Last Call on the draft named above.
> The steps are: community discussion and consensus, publication as RFC,
> an announcement of agreement from the Trust, and the create of
> appropriate boilerplate by the Trust. THEN we can begin publishing in
> the Independent Submission stream again. It would help if the Trust
> actions could be overlapped with (though ultimately contigent upon)
> the Last Call discussion. Let's hope that a month from now it will be
> Bob Braden
> for the RFC Editor
> and the RFC Editorial Board
More information about the rfc-interest