Bill Cole wrote:
Because of the importance of the Internet in general, I would
suggest that RFCs include a legal considerations section for aiding
lawmakers, where relevant.
I really don't think it's a good idea [...]
I don't think that RFCs are a great place to lobby for legislation.
[...] Of course statutes can override
custom, but that is not the business of the RFC.
norms in RFC development have long (and wisely) been averse to
entanglement with law.
I don't know why I differ from everybody else's opinion, but since it
seems to be so, I'll refrain from insisting and respect the more vast
experience. Thanks to all who tried to explain; perhaps one day I'll
understand (for the time being, I haven't even grasped if Asimov meant
his three laws of robotics to be enforced by RFCs or enacted legislation.)
Beyond that, it is clear to me that any grand plan to add a section to
RFC's generally is far outside the scope of the ASRG or the IRTF. this
would be something NOT to be advocated here in the narrow context of
this one document, which is devised as a technical standard with a BCP
companion covering related issues of consensus opinion rather than
objective fact. A campaign to change the way RFC's coexist with legal
systems would belong more at the ISOC layer than here.
Correct. However, because of its subject, this RFC might have been a
good candidate to experiment with such kind of move.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg