Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-16.txt

From: "Jim Sermersheim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 10:18:52 -0600

>>> Olivier Dubuisson <[email-masked]> 7/3/03
12:52:50 AM >>>
>Dear Jim,
>
>regarding Section 9 of 
><http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-16.txt>
>please update the dates of X.680 and X.690 to 2002, for it is the only

>version in force for the ASN.1 standard.

I note also that [Syntaxes] points to the 1997 version of X.690, and
[Models] points to the 1997 version of X.680 (though [Syntaxes] points
to the 2002 version). I don't remember what we decided to do with the
dates of the ITU-T documents, but likely we should apply the changes to
all the documents.

>Would it be acceptable to you if the ASN.1 module defined in your I-D
is 
>checked and pretty-printed by the ITU-T, and published as part of the

>module database on their website at 
><http://www.itu.int/itu-t/asn1/database>?

My read of the copyright statement on the last page permits you to
copy, prepare, and publish a derivative work (so yes)

Jim

>-- 
>Olivier DUBUISSON (leader of the ITU-T ASN.1 Project)
>france telecom R&D
>
>DTL/TAL - 22307 Lannion Cedex - France
>t: +33 2 96 05 38 50 - f: +33 2 96 05 39 45 -
http://asn1.elibel.tm.fr/

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 09:59:39 -0700

>dates of the ITU-T documents, but likely we should apply the changes to

For X.680/X.690, referencing the latest versions is not problematic.
For other ITU-T documents, in particular X.500 series documents, we
need to stick with 2nd edition revisions (e.g, circa 1993).

>><http://www.itu.int/itu-t/asn1/database>?

Verification of the ASN.1 using available checkers would
be appreciated.

>copy, prepare, and publish a derivative work (so yes)

I note that as the ASN.1 is often used and distributed
separately from the RFC, we likely should apply the MIB
copyright guidelines:
   http://www.ietf.org/IESG/STATEMENTS/MIB-COPYRIGHT.txt
so that the ISOC copyright appears in the ASN.1.

Kurt

---

From: "Steven Legg" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2003 10:23:54 +1000

Kurt,

> so that the ISOC copyright appears in the ASN.1.

I agree. We just need to change "this MIB module" to "this ASN.1 module".
I suggest we place the copyright notice as an ASN.1 comment after
the ModuleIdentifier but before the DEFINITIONS keyword, e.g.

Foo { 1 2 3 }

-- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (year). This version of
--  this ASN.1 module is part of RFC xxxx; see the RFC itself
--  for full legal notices.

DEFINITIONS
...

Regards,
Steven

---

From: Olivier Dubuisson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 09:03:39 +0200

> For X.680/X.690, referencing the latest versions is not problematic.

They are freely available from
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/languages/

> Verification of the ASN.1 using available checkers would

Sebastien Castano from the ITU TSB will keep you informed as soon as the 
work is done and published on the ITU website so that you can hyperlink 
to the module database.

> so that the ISOC copyright appears in the ASN.1.

Good idea. We will add this copyright statement at the end of the ASN.1 
modules defined in RFCs before they are pretty-printed. But what kind of 
copyright statement would you like to see for Jim's I-D?
-- 
Olivier DUBUISSON (leader of the ITU-T ASN.1 Project)
france telecom R&D

DTL/TAL - 22307 Lannion Cedex - France
t: +33 2 96 05 38 50 - f: +33 2 96 05 39 45 - http://asn1.elibel.tm.fr/

---

From: Olivier Dubuisson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 10:41:46 +0200

> --  for full legal notices.

Sebastien, please handle this with the small change that it is not an 
RFC but an I-D (OK Steven?).
-- 
Olivier DUBUISSON
france telecom R&D

---

From: "Steven Legg" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 10:05:22 +1000

Olivier,

> work is done and published on the ITU website so that you can 

Are you sure you want to publish ASN.1 from an Internet draft ?
It's a good idea to run it through a syntax checker as soon as
possible after any changes, but I would wait on publishing it
until after the draft becomes an RFC. Also, by that time we should
have added the necessary copyright statements.

Regards,
Steven

---

From: Olivier Dubuisson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 09:03:04 +0200

> have added the necessary copyright statements.

No problem. We'll wait.
-- 
Olivier DUBUISSON
france telecom R&D