[rfc-i] Last Call on draft-braden-independent-submission-00.txt
falk at bbn.com
Thu Sep 17 13:44:53 PDT 2009
I strongly support this draft.
The IRTF will very likely use as much of the final text as possible
(given that derivative works are permitted :).
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 involved.
> 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 discussion.
> 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 settled.
> Bob Braden
> for the RFC Editor
> and the RFC Editorial Board
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest