Re: Informational RFC to be: draft-shah-extreme-eaps-05.txt

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

> 	The online material at www.ietf.org gives that as 1 of 3
> choices that one must select from.  If you find those words
> confusing, then you all on the IESG should put new boilerplate out
> for folks to select from that says "other than to publish as an
> Internet-Draft or RFC".

I don't find the words confusing. I was probably too cryptic in my
note, but it seems like the second boiler plate is what you are
intending:

         This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to
         all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 except that the
         right to produce derivative works is not granted.

The third choice (which your document uses) does not give us the right
to publish the document as an RFC. To avoid any confusion, it is best
that everyone understands what the intended IPR boilerplate of the RFC
is and that it matches what is in the ID. If you've already had this
kind of conversation with the rfc editor, then fine. But since we get
so few of these, apparent mismatches in expectation aren't always
caught right away.

> 	Extreme certainly desires for this to be published by RFC Editor as an
> Informational RFC with a no-derivative-rights clause.

That is what I expected, but it  helps to hear it stated.

Thomas