Joe Touch wrote:
There were times when there were no rights granted explicitly, at least.
I indicated the three ranges in a previous mail.
In which case the Note Well concludently applies to the I-D contents,
which seems to have first appeared on www.ietf.org around 2001,
http://web.archive.org/web/20010413091132/http://ietf.org/overview.html
and slightly extended in 2002:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020605140239/http://ietf.org/overview.html
primarily refering to the IETF process described in rfc2026 section 10:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-10
10.2, 10.3, 10.3.1 (2), 10.3.1 (5), 10.3.1 (7)
10.3.1. All Contributions
7. The contributor represents that there are no limits to the
contributor's ability to make the grants acknowledgments and
agreements above that are reasonably and personally known to the
contributor.
By ratifying this description of the IETF process the Internet
Society warrants that it will not inhibit the traditional open and
*> free access to IETF documents for which license and right have
*> been assigned according to the procedures set forth in this
*> section, including Internet-Drafts and RFCs. This warrant is
*> perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its
*> successors or assigns.
So which specific part of "including Internet-Drafts and RFCs"
and "This warrent is perpetual" caused your impression that
there was a time-limit on an I-D contribution?
-Martin
btw. rfc2026 10.3.1 (2) looks like an explicit non-policy for dissemmination
or termination of dissemination to me:
2. The contributor acknowledges that the ISOC and IETF have no duty
to publish or otherwise use or disseminate any contribution.
I would be OK with a single person from (IESG member or IETF Chair)
quickly decides about suspending dissemination of a document based on
personal judgement and that the IESG wiggles out by themselves an
informal procedure (rather than a formal policy) for safeguarding
the process (from bias and abuse). This cuts into their time budget
and seems to not be a concerningly frequent occurence to spend
much polish on it at this point.