[rfc-i] Big Picture and RFC format
paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Thu Jul 12 08:37:48 PDT 2012
On Jul 12, 2012, at 5:30 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
> As far as answering a subpoena goes, what is relevant is whether the
> IETF has the documents requested and whether they can attest to the
The message that started this thread was about the RFC Editor, not the IETF.
> Since they are stored on IETF servers and digitally signed by the
> IETF, the IETF is the respondent.
While RFCs are stored on IETF-controlled servers, they are also stored on servers controlled by the RFC Editor. When the RFC Editor responds to a subpoena, I hope they talk about the data stored on the servers that they control, not someone else's server.
> Now oddly enough, the IETF does not exist as a separate legal entity
> and so getting the certs issued is something of a performance each
> time we have switched providers. But that is not something that
> bothers courts much when demanding production of evidence.
And therefore is irrelevant here.
More information about the rfc-interest