Re: A priori IPR choices [Re: Third Last Call:draft-housley-tls-authz-extns]

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>]

Phill,

> If there were in addition some standard non disclosure contracts, standard contracts for holding pre-standards meeting and the like the result could be turned into a book which most managers in the valley would probably end up buying. 

Most of them, and those in Armonk that I used to work for, bought Section 10 of RFC 2026 and its successors. Certainly, open 
source was less of a factor when that regime was designed, but Linux still supports TCP/IP as far as I know. So I think the 
experimental evidence supports the arguments you're hearing from me, Ted and others.

Don't confuse that with a liking for standards encumbered by patents with expensive licensing conditions. It's simply a matter 
of finding a pragmatic compromise in a world where software patents are granted, and often upheld by the courts, so that the 
goal of 100% unencumbered standards is unrealistic.

   Brian

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf