Re: [Idr] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-05.txt

[Ron Bonica <rbonica at juniper.net>]

+1

John G. Scudder wrote:
> Yakov,
> 
> I've held back from replying until now because of my job affiliation,
> but since you ask:
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I'd like to think that I would have said the same regardless of
> affiliation though it's hard to prove a hypothetical.
> 
> FWIW I've read the current arguments related to IPR issues.  My
> *personal* feeling about this is that I think the current situation with
> IPR is pretty awful, but that problem and its remedies are both far
> beyond the scope of what the IETF is competent and able to accomplish. 
> Although the IETF is famous for trying to boil the ocean, it would be
> great to skip that step this time.
> 
> IMO the (corrected) licensing terms that were disclosed are nearly the
> least repulsive possible, and probably the least repulsive that it's
> reasonable to expect.
> 
> Making the best of a bad situation,
> 
> --John
> 
> On Mar 5, 2009, at 7:04 PM, Yakov Rekhter wrote:
> 
>> Dave,
>>
>>> Sue, Yakov -
>>>
>>> This deadline has come and gone with zero comments on the re-LC of
>>> this draft. Given the comments and discussion on IPR disclosures on
>>> the IDR list in general, I (and the IESG) need a more concrete sign
>>> that the WG has consensus that the document should continue to
>>> progress towards publication.
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> With this in mind I'd like to ask members of the WG to reply to
>> this e-mail with either "yes" or "no" (where "yes" means progress
>> draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec towards standardization, and "no" means
>> do not progress draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec towards standardization).
>>
>> Please note that (a) silence does not count either way, and (b) a
>> handful of "yes" or "no" does not make consensus either way.
>>
>> The deadline for response is March 19, 2009.
>>
>> Yakov.
>>
>>> ------------
>>
>>> Related to IPR, I strongly encourage all IETF participants to read and
>>> understand:
>>>
>>>       http://www.ietf.org/overview.html (read and understand the NOTE
>>> WELL)
>>>
>>>       http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3979.txt?number=3979
>>>
>>>       http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4879.txt
>>>
>>>
>>> I refer the WG to these documents and pointers as well:
>>>
>>>       http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3669.txt?number=3669
>>>
>>>       https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/
>>>
>>>      
>>> http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/edu/attachment/wiki/IETF72/72newcomer
>> s.ppt
>>>   (page 48 - 56)
>>>
>>>       Newcomer's training at the upcoming IETF held by the edu team
>>> on Sunday 2009.03.22 at 1300 in Imperial B (see
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/
>> meeting/74/agenda.txt
>>>  for any changes)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you have difficulty keeping up with IPR disclosures, here is an RSS
>>> feed of all IETF IPR disclosures:
>>>
>>> feed:https://datatracker.ietf.org/feed/ipr/
>>>
>>> If you believe that you'd like the ADs to spend some time in the
>>> RTGAREA WG meeting to provide some education on IPR issues, rule,
>>> requirements, etc at the IETF please contact us privately or
>>> mailto:rtg-ads at t
>> ools.ietf.org
>>>
>>> Thanks and hope it helps.
>>>
>>> -DWard
>>>
>>> On Feb 17, 2009, at 6:30 PM, Yakov Rekhter wrote:
>>>
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> Given the recent IPR disclosure (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/
>>>> 1088)
>>>> associated with the flow-spec draft
>>>> (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-05.txt )
>>>> we are going to re-WG-LC the document and rerun the publication
>>>> process.
>>>>
>>>> The deadline for comments is 3/2/2009.
>>>>
>>>> Sue & Yakov.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Idr mailing list
>>>> Idr at ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Idr mailing list
>> Idr at ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>