Dear all, The IETF is committed to making all text available with a permissive license and with appropriate attribution. A fantastic objective I wholeheartedly support. As I understand things, generative AI/LLMs, by their nature, are likely unable to provide the necessary assurances that the generated material is compatible with the provisions of BCP 78 (RFC5378) or that the original authors are properly attributed. I can see that AI tooling is helping some folks with study & analysis, (which is great for them!), however I am not sure that submitting an internet-draft to the IETF that was (partially) generated using AI would be a wise path to follow: I recently spotted someone who contemplated submitting a 33,000+ word LLM-generated I-D for review to a working group. The machine certainly was not a subject matter expert - but at first glance it all looked legit, if such submissions were to happen they'd have the potential to take up a lot of time resources. I personally would recommend working groups against adoption of AI generated text (mostly because of the potential for issues related to intellectual property). IMHO, handwritten originals are the way to go when using the IETF publication venue! :) The FreeBSD project recently added some clarifications, result: https://reviews.freebsd.org/differential/changeset/?ref=1420532 discussion: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D50650?id=156417 Other entities also provided documentation on the topic: https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/generative-ai https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html Is it documented somewhere for IETF newcomers that internet-draft submissions should not contain LLM/AI generated text? I imagine that similar clarifications for the IETF context along the lines of "text _about_ AI is fine, but text generated by AI has legal implications" would be very helpful. Where can I point newcomers on this topic? Kind regards, Job
