Subject: An interesting sub-note for all of you using the xml tool for drafts

From: Randall Stewart <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 10:51:31 -0400

Dear all:

I recently submitted a draft to the ietf repository and got
this response... Note that the front of my document had
"

    This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions
    of Section 3 of RFC 3667.  By submitting this Internet-Draft, each
    author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of
    which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of
    which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
    RFC 3668.

"

as the very first paragraph.. .this was generated via the XML tool..

So, I guess the automated tool will no longer accept this statement
with a reference to RFC 36668.... it has to be BCP 79... and the
section number.

So if you are planning to do the "rush to submit" at the last
hour... and if you are using the xml tool.. be sure to save the
wording below and manually edit it into place... that is what
I have been doing this week to all the drafts I have been submitting..

If you don't .. you will have a rather funny surprise aka rejected
draft... and that would not be fun if your a procrastanator :-0

R

> 
> The Secretariat CANNOT process your Internet-Draft submission due to
> following reason(s):
> 
>  * All Internet-Drafts must have on the first page an intellectual property
> rights (IPR) statement that says:
> 
> 
> By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents
> that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he
> or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of
> which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in
> accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
> 

-- 
Randall Stewart
803-345-0369 <or> 815-342-5222(cell)

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

---

From: Carl Malamud <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 08:09:31 -0700 (PDT)

Randall's method works, or you can do what the readme suggests:

<rfc ipr='full3978' docName='draft-mrose-writing-rfcs-01'>

see:

http://xml.resource.org/authoring/draft-mrose-writing-rfcs.html#ipr

Regards,

Carl

---

From: wayne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 11:10:45 -0500

> with a reference to RFC 36668.... it has to be BCP 79... and the

It is my understanding that v1.30 needed to support the lastest IPR
boilerplate. 

Be aware that v1.30 also changes some formatting and this can lead to
a fair amount of work to "fix" things.

-wayne

---

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2005 14:46:13 -0400

> It is my understanding that v1.30 needed to support the lastest IPR

1.29 supports the latest IPR boilerplate, and was released before the
requirement changed.  You do have to be sure to update the ipr=
attribute in your source document.

> a fair amount of work to "fix" things.

I'm not sure if you mean 1.29 here or the as-yet-unreleased 1.30.

  Bill

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 10:53:16 +0200

> http://xml.resource.org/authoring/draft-mrose-writing-rfcs.html#ipr

A number of us, including the IETF Chair, have discovered this
experimentally. It's not illogical - if your source file says
<rfc ipr='full3667'...> you get exactly what you asked for, i.e. the
obsolete boilerplate. The id-nits tool will warn you - it is
well worth running that before submitting *any* I-D, whether produced
by xml2rfc or another method.

See http://ietf.levkowetz.com/tools/idnits/idnits.pyht

    Brian

---

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 08:36:52 -0400

On 6/9/05, Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]> wrote:
> It's not illogical - if your source file says

Another tool that is worth running on the xml source before using
xml2rfc on it is at http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/ietf/xml2rfc-valid/ ;
it will check that the source is well-formed and valid according to
the DTD (XML generated outside of a validating editor is often not
valid, and sometimes even not well-formed, even though xml2rfc creates
a fine-looking document from it), and also checks for various other
errors including the IPR requested.

  Bill

---

From: Frank Ellermann <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 20:29:38 +0200

> See http://ietf.levkowetz.com/tools/idnits/idnits.pyht

I never got the idnits webservice version to do anything else
but show its 'usage' info.  No idea what's wrong, maybe it's
only my browser.  But ml2rfc and Bill's validator work online,
his ABNF checker is also very nice.  Bye, Frank
-- 
-- 
-- 
-- 
--

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 22:33:45 +0200

Hi Frank,

> his ABNF checker is also very nice.  Bye, Frank

!!  Ok, I'll have to find out what's up here, then.

Taking this off list, with a follow-up letter to Frank to work
out what's the matter.

	Henrik