Subject: RE: request for feedback: change to the ID boilerplate

From: Alfred Hönes <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 10:55:31 +0100 (MEZ)

I'm very much in favor of doing the proposed I-D boilerplate
compactification in some way, getting rid of OBE material,
and making all that pending headers and boilerplate changes
at a single cutoff date!

But if and when changing anything in the I-D boilerplate ...
could you please also drop in the missing article in the very first
sentence of "Status of this Memo":
                                      vvvvv
   This Internet-Draft is submitted to the IETF in full conformance
   with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Regarding the discussion on IETFers and non-IETFers, I would
like to add:
Since there's no concept of formal membership for the IETF,
anyone making use of the IETF's I-D publication process arguably
becomes a "participant" in the IETF.  I-D authors are donating
IPR on the submitted material to the IETF Trust, as documented
by the I-D author(s) in accepting the BCP 78 & 79 rules via the
mandatory inclusion of the above quoted sentence.
That makes any distinction between insiders and outsiders moot
in this context of Internet-Drafts.

Kind regards,
  Alfred.

-- 

+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys.  |
| Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18         |
| D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  [email-masked]                     |
+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 11:46:24 -0500

Alfred nailed this one - it's exactly what was wrapping me around the poll. 

The set of people who submit I-Ds doesn't map onto any other named set :-)

Thanks,

Spencer