![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
> FWIW, I agree with Brian. Pulling this (waiting until the IESG > approves and only then filing the disclosure) on a media type > registration seems particularly egregious but is, in any event, > exactly the type of situation the IPR rules are intended to > prevent. Like him, I believe that the IESG can recind its > action on this basis without having to go through the procedural > clutter of an appeal. In addition, if an appeal were really > necessary, nothing prevents one or more of the IESG members who > believe that they would have acted differently had the > disclosure occurred on a timely basis from filing it. +1 I'll also note that nothing prevents then from registrering this in the media type vnd. tree. Ned
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.