[Asrg] New Version Notification for draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl-07

[Alessandro Vesely]

Bill Cole wrote:
>>>>>> Because of the importance of the Internet in general, I would
>>>>>> suggest that RFCs include a legal considerations section for aiding
>>>>>> lawmakers, where relevant.
>>>>> I really don't think it's a good idea [...]
>>>
>>> I don't think that RFCs are a great place to lobby for legislation.
>>>
>> [...] Of course statutes can override 
>> custom, but that is not the business of the RFC.
> 
> norms in RFC development have long (and wisely) been averse to 
> entanglement with law.

I don't know why I differ from everybody else's opinion, but since it 
seems to be so, I'll refrain from insisting and respect the more vast 
experience. Thanks to all who tried to explain; perhaps one day I'll 
understand (for the time being, I haven't even grasped if Asimov meant 
his three laws of robotics to be enforced by RFCs or enacted legislation.)

> Beyond that, it is clear to me that any grand plan to add a section to 
> RFC's generally is far outside the scope of the ASRG or the IRTF. this 
> would be something NOT to be advocated here in the narrow context of 
> this one document, which is devised as a technical standard with a BCP 
> companion covering related issues of consensus opinion rather than 
> objective fact. A campaign to change the way RFC's coexist with legal 
> systems would belong more at the ISOC layer than here.

Correct. However, because of its subject, this RFC might have been a 
good candidate to experiment with such kind of move.