Andrew,
Thankyou for spending time on this.
On 2010-03-12 06:16, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
...
It is instead an appeal that the documents were not published with
disclaimers attached.
Interesting. Since we're being legalistic, all IETF documents carry
the standard disclaimer (by reference in recent RFCs) which says,
among other things:
... DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
That seems to cover most angles. I can't see why the IESG could be
expected to add technical disclaimers to a consensus document. In fact,
doing so would probably be a process violation in itself.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf