[rfc-i] Big Picture and RFC format

[SM]

Hi Phillip,

I did not elaborate on the question as it may be off-topic.  The 
usual legal disclaimer apply to the comments below.

At 05:30 12-07-2012, 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
>authenticity.

That's the view I had.  I am not disagreeing with you.  Some of the 
information requested goes beyond a request to determine the 
authenticity of a RFC.

>Since they are stored on IETF servers and digitally signed by the
>IETF, the IETF is the respondent.

The scope of what is an IETF server was broader than I expected.

>Now oddly enough, the IETF does not exist as a separate legal entity

The views in internal discussions are very different from the view 
seen from the outside.

Regards,
-sm