% On Thu, 28 Sep 2000 09:27:23 PDT, Bill Manning said:
% > Two key points here. The first paragraph explicitly denys the IETF from
% > doing anything w/ the document other than publishing it as an ID.
% > The second point is that the document, as submitted, is only valid, AS an
ID,
% > for a maximum of six months from the instance of inital publication by
% > the IETF.
% >
% > So, at this point, the document in question is not an Internet Draft, valid
% > or otherwise.
%
% 2) "If it doesn't progress as an I-D, it's withdrawn off the I-D track but
% still usable as historic information".
%
% I'm looking at case 2 as similar to granting one-time rights to a journal
% to publish an interview, but people reading it in the back issues for years
% to come....
% --
The draft was not the product of an IETF wg and was intended for Informational
RFC status. The IESG/IAB declined to accept it w/o the ISOC boilerplate and
so the document lives on in the FreeBSD & LINUX FAQs as well as at least
two published books and as part of network operational culture.
So it might be applicable to your #2 above, with the one distinction that
the IETF is going to -republish- the material, i.e. folks won't be reading
back issues, its a current publication of the IETF.
I feel that the IETF had at least six months to decide they wanted the material
in the IETF document series. They declined. Are they allowed to republish w/o
my consent?
--bill