Re: in support of axfr-clarify

[Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>]

> No, the cost is not relevant.

I think this is absurd, and irresponsible. Cost and effects on
interoperability are always issues to be seriously considered.

> What is relevant is doing it right so
> there are no future problems and any future extensions will be
> implementable in some reasonable fashion.  The only question being
> addressed here is what is the meaning of "right"?

"Right" might not be the same as "Common". But changes from common aren't
"clarifications".  "Right" depends on your point of view.

> You can't fix IXFR if AXFR is not nailed down.

I'm OK with that. However, AXFR should be nailed down in ways that
correspond to how people reasonably interpreted the vague spec. The
clarification should be done so as to minimize the breakage to existing
implementations.

I think that AXFR can be nailed down without severely impacting existing
implementations, and I expect that IXFR can be made to work with the
existing (and clarified) AXFR.

> >An applicant for a trademark must declare that he is using, or intends to
> >use, the mark in commerce. See 37 C.F.R. 2.33.
>
> Your statement does not include the word sell, for profit or otherwise.
> There are many non-profits in the US that have trademarks. You also
> seem to be restricting yourself to the US. Are you saying that ISC
> cannot trademark the name whereever they please?

This says nothing of the sort.

Non-profit is not the same as "non-commercial". The ISC uses names in
commerce: it seeks donations, owns property, hires employees, and (if I
recall, either offers either support or directions to Vixies consulting
operations), and promotes the Bind, Inn, and DCHPD packages.

ISC claims (rightly or wrongly) a trademark on Bind. That indicates that
it intends to use "Bind"  in commerce.  Whether it makes a profit or not
is irrelevant.  Bind is a product of ISC.

Whether that trademark claim is invalid (by prior public domain use by
UCB), is irrelevant.  Once ISC makes a declaration of a trademark, it
can't later say the "product" is not commercial.

		--Dean


--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>