Ray Pelletier wrote:
The Trustees adopted the Non-Profit Open Software License 3.0 in
September 2007 as the license it would use for open sourcing
software done as work-for-hire and that contributed to it, at that
time thinking of code contributed by IETF volunteers. See: http://
Is it clear that the contributions contemplated by these documents
would require a different treatment?
Disclaimer: IANAL, and I apologize if I am misunderstanding
something about the license you referenced, but...
It seems to me that the "Non-Profit Open Software License 3.0", while
fine for the source code to IETF tools, places more restrictions and
more burden on someone who uses the code than we would want to place
on someone who uses a MIB, XML schema or other "code" from our RFCs.
For example, the license places an obligation on someone using the
source code to distribute copies of the original source code with any
products they distribute. Effectively, this means that anyone who
distributes products based on MIBs, XML schemas or other "code" from
RFCs would need to put up a partial RFC repository. Why would we
IETF mailing list