Problem with the BCP 78 Rights assignment.

["todd glassey" <tglassey at earthlink.net>]

By the way - if you sit down and read BCP78 you might notice it doesn't
answer many of the questions it is designed to answer for some reason.

As to the mechanical rights necessary to implement the proof-of-concepts
necessary to qualify as a standard...  the BCP78 Rights assignment lists the
necessary rights for the IETF to create a standard and there is nothing in
it about the rights required to implement the protocol in the instances of
the two required implementation stack. So BCP78 deals with publishing
documents and the use of the technology from them intact.

The problem is that the IETF's Process requires two separate instances of
the proposed technology for interoperability testing.

As to BCP78 itself, what there is, is commentary about MIB like
technologies which can be used by third parties. The question is
what about the actual technological underpinnings.  I.e.  who is to own
those and does the IETF itself own them or does it just get free use of
them to have its interoperability testing performed on them?


Todd Glassey



_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg