Bill Manning wrote:
% Bill Manning wrote:
% [..from boilerplate..]
% > 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.
% > What constitutes "validity"?
% I would suggest only "possibly of current interest to an IETF WG".
And if it becomes of "current interest to an IETF WG" after the
six month window? Or if it is of interest to a non IETF WG, e.g.
a legally oriented person doing IPR work? Can the IETF make
"non-valid" collections of drafts available for prior art searches
as an IETF function, esp. given the language in the boilerplate?
I dont see the definition of 'valid' as being binding on anyone
to *not* be interested in the document after 6 months, only that
no-one should *presume* the IETF cares about the I-D if it is more
than 6 months old. If in addition you've revoked the IETF's right to
copy your I-D's words after 6 months, any WG newly interested in your
old work simply has to find a different set of words to express those