Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-ipr-ietf-trust-update-02

From: Spencer at Yahoo <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 15:40:36 -0700 (PDT)

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For
background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at 
<http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.

Summary - This document is ready for publication as BCP. I have
a suggestion, and two questions, but it's ready as-is.

Comments - 

- I wondered if "IETF Trust" should be added to the Terminology
section.

- When comparing Section 2.8 of this document with 5.6 of RFC
3978, I didn't see any occurances of "ISOC" in the target
section, but the text in 2.8 says to replace "ISOC" with "IETF
Trust". I'm assuming this is a cut-and-paste error, and it's
harmless if it is (no change to resulting text), but wanted to
mention it now.

- And the 64-dollar question - this draft is basically diffs to
RFC 3978; would the resulting RFC be a republish with the diffs
applied, or would it look like this draft and require the reader
to apply the diffs?

Please look at these comments along with any other Last Call
comments you may receive.

Thanks,

Spencer Dawkins

(My apologies for posting from my Yahoo account. E-mail life in
the Dallas area is Not Good)

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: [email-masked] (Scott Bradner)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:07:29 -0400 (EDT)

the idea here is to publish this document to close the legal loop 
relating to the IETF trust then replace it at a later date with a fuller 
update of rfc 3978

the legal loop should have been closed a long time ago 

Scott