My point is only that while we have an active WG looking at the question
of license terms for the use of text from RFCs, it wouldn't be
right for the IESG to unilaterally approve a new policy, even for a
single draft. I don't believe the approved text does set a new
policy.
Brian
Tony Hansen wrote:
And *as* one of the authors of the proposed-RFC in question, I find the
statement even more curious. Given the objections, I was proposing
different text that would have aligned the statement with text already
found in other RFCs already published.
Tony Hansen
tony(_at_)att(_dot_)com
Sam Hartman wrote:
"Brian" == Brian E Carpenter <brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com> writes:
Brian> Tony, That would have amounted to the author and IESG
Brian> deciding to change the IETF's policy on derivative works,
Brian> which would have been way out of line, especially in view
Brian> of the ongoing debate about this point in the ipr WG.
Had this sentence been added by the author it would not have changed
anything about IETF policy.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf