[Foundation] Recent confusion about the JSF, JINC and the IETF

bauer at michaelbauer.com bauer at michaelbauer.com
Thu Aug 1 23:13:39 CDT 2002


Given Jer's post on this, it seems that the issue with respect to the IETF 
submission and relinquishment of claims to IP by JINC over XMPP is not 
really an issue.  The point is that no one is claiming IP over XMPP as 
part of the requirements for submission to IETF.  Original ownership is 
irrelevant as long as no one is going to claim subsequent ownership.  And 
not claiming subsequent ownership is fine because getting an IETF standard 
is a Good Thing (tm).  How this gets done is not quite as important as 
getting it done.


On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Julian Missig wrote:

> You're right. That just confuses me, then :)
> 
> Julian
> 
> bauer at michaelbauer.com wrote:
> > Not to be a nit, but the reference is to "project" not "product".  
> > Terminology is important in these discussions.
> > 
> > On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Julian Missig wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >>Richard Dobson wrote:
> >>
> >>>This is the part that most worries me:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>The confusion has been furthered by a couple of lines in section 6 of
> >>>>the minutes of the IETF BOF minutes (available at
> >>>>http://www.jabber.org/ietf/bof-minutes.txt):
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Q: Are you comfortable with the notion of giving up control of the
> >>>>  technology in your flagship project?
> >>>>A: Yes, this has sign off at the highest levels of managment in Jabber,
> >>>>  Inc.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Q: Will you support the resulting specification?
> >>>>A: Yes, this has sign-off at the highest levels of managment in Jabber,
> >>>>  Inc.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>That Jabber, Inc appears to be making decisions on behalf of the community
> >>>without consultation and infact suggesting they think the own the protocol,
> >>>it is also worrying that we only find out about this after the event, a
> >>>decision of this magnetude needs to be made democratically by a vote of the
> >>>JSF membership the only people who can actually make this decision, I dont
> >>>really think its the place of Jabber, Inc to make these decisions.
> >>
> >>Uh, I'm fairly certain the "you" in those questions refers to Jabber, 
> >>Inc., not the Jabber community or the JSF. The JSF does not have a 
> >>"flagship product". You could argue that jabberd is the "flagship 
> >>product" except for the fact that we have been actively trying to make 
> >>it /not/ the only open Jabber server implementation.
> >>
> >>Julian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> Members at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/members
> 

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Bauer     bauer at michaelbauer.com       http://www.michaelbauer.com




More information about the Members mailing list