Re: recourse if our rules are violated?

[Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>]

Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de> writes:

> Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>
>>> How about a default rule "remove RFC from standards track" that
>>> can be overruled by an IETF consensus ?
>
>> Remember that two of the possible kinds of IPR disclosures are:
>
>> - "oops, we forgot to tell you about this patent, here's the license that
>> clearly and unambiguously gives you permission to use it in any way you
>> want to"
>
>> - "oops, we forgot to tell you about this patent, here's a pile of legal
>> mutterings that tell you absolutely nothing and will leave you wondering
>> about the ability to use the technology for the next 20 years"
>
>> and every shade in between.
>> I don't like "default" rules.
>
> If you don't like the SHOULD we can try a MAY without IETF consensus:
>
> "An approved standards track RFC identified to specify 'patented'
>  technology after its approval, where contributors neglected their
>  duties to disclose IPR under BCP 79, MAY be removed from standards
>  track, if there's no IETF consensus for a different approach."

I like this text.  It should be clarified that 'remove from standards
track' actually means re-labeling it as information (or historical?).
That avoids people thinking that some RFCs will be physically removed.

I suppose the process for this would be to for someone to notice the
situation, send a request to the IESG, the IESG will last call the
proposal to move a particular standard to informational, and will act
depending on the last call comments received.

> There is already a "default" rule how to get rid of cruft, but it's
> not appropriate for such submarine patents, and getting a consensus
> to demote the RFC might be tricky.  With an explicit MAY the IETF
> consensus has to be 'no, we want to keep this RFC anyway' to avoid
> the demotion, and picking this "option" (MAY) would be limited to
> the IESG (or the outcome of an appeal).

Right.

/Simon

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