The rules for joint works are somewhat esoteric, but the short answer is
that any of the authors have the right to grant rights on behalf of all
the authors because of the "joint" work nature.
Yours,
Joel
On 10/6/2023 9:19 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Thanks, Joel.
That’s really helpful.
Pedantically, suppose there was an author on the old draft who is not
an author on the new draft?
(I think we are into esoteric grounds here, but just wondering.)
A
*From:*Joel Halpern <j...@joelhalpern.com>
*Sent:* 06 October 2023 14:08
*To:* adr...@olddog.co.uk; 'Matthew Bocci (Nokia)'
<matthew.bo...@nokia.com>; bess@ietf.org
*Cc:* draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-us...@ietf.org
*Subject:* Re: [bess] WG Adoption Poll for
draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-uasge-16
Not speaking for the trust, but as someone who has worked in the
rights pace for IETF for quite some time, if the authors update the
rights grant to grant the needed rights (by replacing the
boilerplate), then the new draft grants the needed rights. They have
legal ability to make such a change. Sure, it is still the case that
one can not work directly from the old draft. The current (-17) draft
appears to grant the rights, and it is within the authors remit to do so.
Yours,
Joel
On 10/6/2023 8:54 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
Hi Matthew,
I support this being a WG document.
IANAL. I don’t understand the process by which an author who
previously said “no derivative works” for an I-D is able to relax
that constraint in a new revision. Maybe simply posting a new
revision without the constraint is enough. Maybe the constraint on
the old versions still applies. Would be neat to get an opinion
from the Trust or IETF Counsel.
Cheers,
Adrian
*From:*BESS <bess-boun...@ietf.org> <mailto:bess-boun...@ietf.org>
*On Behalf Of *Matthew Bocci (Nokia)
*Sent:* 05 October 2023 11:45
*To:* bess@ietf.org
*Cc:* draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-us...@ietf.org
*Subject:* [bess] WG Adoption Poll for
draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-uasge-16
WG
This email starts a one-week WG adoption poll for
draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-uasge-16 [1]
A little bit of history: A previous version was adopted, completed
WG last call, and publication requested as an Informational RFC.
v15 of this draft was reviewed by the IESG and found to have a
restrictive clause in the boilerplate. This has now been removed,
but since that clause was inconsistent with the draft having been
adopted as a WG document in the first place, we have been asked to
go through the process again.
Please review the draft and post any comments to the BESS mailing
list.
This poll will close on Thursday 12^th October.
Regards
Matthew
[1] draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage-16 - SD-WAN edge nodes are
commonly interconnected by multiple types of underlay networks
owned and managed by different network providers.
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bess-bgp-sdwan-usage/16/>
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
_______________________________________________
BESS mailing list
BESS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess
