[AFS3-std] Options for AFS Standardisation

[Russ Allbery]

Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu> writes:
> Simon Wilkinson <simon@sxw.org.uk> writes:

>> 2.3.1.  Drafts
>>
>>    Proposals for standardisation are made as Internet Drafts.  These
>>    documents must be compliant with all of the provisions of the IETF's
>>    Guidelines to Authors of Internet Drafts [ID-Guide] and the documents
>>    it references.  Note that it is not permissible for documents that
>>    wish to progress through the AFS standardisation process to prohibit
>>    modification or derivative works, or to bar publication as an RFC.
>>    Drafts should be named as individual contributions, and contain the
>>    string afs3-stds within their name.
>
> I'd like us to specifically call out the following statement from the
> Copyrights and Patent Rights in RFCs document on the RFC Editor site and
> specifically state that this requirement applies to all Internet Drafts
> submitted as part of this process as well:
>
>    For independent RFC submissions, however, the RFC Editor requires that
>    authors grant unlimited permission for derivative works, with
>    appropriate credits and citations.

In re-reading this, the difference between my statement and Simon's isn't
clear if you've not previously dove into this particular boondoggle.  The
problem is this portion of BCP 78:

   The IETF needs to be able to evolve IETF Documents in response to
   experience gained in the deployment of the technologies described in
   such IETF Documents, to incorporate developments in research and to
   react to changing conditions on the Internet and other IP networks.
   In order to do this the IETF must be able to produce derivatives of
   its documents; thus the IETF must obtain the right from Contributors
   to produce derivative works.  Note though that the IETF only requires
   this right for the production of derivative works within the IETF
   Standards Process.  The IETF does not need, nor does it obtain, the
   right to let derivative works be created outside of the IETF
   Standards Process other than as noted in Section 3.3 (E).

(Said section deals with code excerpts.)  All of the restrictions imposed
by the IETF, apart from the independent publication requirements for RFCs,
only require derivative works be possible for the IETF.

Apart from the many other problems with this position, this is
insufficient for our purposes.  We need the standardization documents to
be covered under a typical free license that doesn't put limitations on to
whom they are granting a license for reproduction, redistribution, and
derivatve works (and redistribution thereof).  The Internet Draft
submissions guidelines even with the above caveat aren't obviously
sufficient; they could be read as only requiring that one not prohibit all
derivative works, not that one grant a license for derivative works to
everyone irrespective of their affiliation with the IETF.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>