On 2020-05-17 Simon Josefsson <si...@josefsson.org> wrote: > Andreas Metzler <ametz...@bebt.de> writes: > > Do we consider ASN.1 modules (e.g. the specification of > > AttCertValidityPeriod in rfc 3281) to be code or specification? > > > > On one hand the rfc coyright fixup for "code components" in newer > > RFCs (post Nov 2008) explicitely includes ASN.1 modules as one of > > the things being made available under BSD licenses. Which implies that > > they are code, or at least that somebody thought clarification could not > > hurt. [...] > Hi! I believe the whole distinction between what is code and what is > specification was a mistake that the IETF did. As far as I know, Debian > does not care, as long as the license is free. If the IETF is clear > that ASN.1 modules are BSD licensed, I don't think there is any problem > for Debian -- or what would the problem be?
The problem is not about the ASN.1 modules in the new RFCs but about those from the old RFCs, which were *not* explicitely licenced as free software. If we consider these old ASN.1 modules software we have a problem, if we think they are specification, comparable to BNF in RFC 821 we do not. IMHO. cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
