IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima] Use of the chartering tool for ANIMA - IPR

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Sat, 13 September 2014 07:30 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABF441A04A9 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:30:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -16.153
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.153 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.652, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lPu6jkEMt0VR for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:30:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF3281A0B10 for <anima@ietf.org>; Sat, 13 Sep 2014 00:30:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=963; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1410593422; x=1411803022; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=I33Upm7TKTAY4zfFu+M7SHGYUZ4TGDl2vwLEFF+Ymiw=; b=fkPDO9GU7NVC8heYQWqcuzz6WvKBzx3BCXrJp+8uKdVIXyiuqtFJyrE6 cfebG78z+6+aXedQ33DavbXN1MeO6QxUsAlj+yENpm86NoXFS0z0q1Ifn Ye2LcwQPHxNaarslxavLBDjTDBuTbre8nZOyIniRrg8AzVsCjzyStakak 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqIEAM/xE1StJssW/2dsb2JhbABfhzPNXgGBH3iEBAEBAwEjFUABEAsaAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBRQYNAQcBAYgyCKcVlVwBF4EsjT5jB4J4gVMBBIRblVyCUYdHhGWJE4NgO4J5AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,516,1406592000"; d="scan'208";a="175557541"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Sep 2014 07:30:19 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.84] (ams-bclaise-8913.cisco.com [10.60.67.84]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s8D7UIF2001035; Sat, 13 Sep 2014 07:30:19 GMT
Message-ID: <5413F28A.4060206@cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 09:30:18 +0200
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "Papadimitriou, Dimitri (Dimitri)" <dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <54117DD5.3090303@cisco.com> <84675BAA8C49154AB81E2587BE8BDF832345311E@FR711WXCHMBA07.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <5413136E.1060801@cisco.com> <84675BAA8C49154AB81E2587BE8BDF8323453C1A@FR711WXCHMBA07.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <5413568B.5060801@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5413568B.5060801@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/93R6i0zk-KF7emRQJXAkM4wjFwU
Cc: "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Anima] Use of the chartering tool for ANIMA - IPR
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 07:30:33 -0000

Dear all,

>> Side question: as the IETF now asks for IPR related issues once adopting a document (from its charter), what would happen in case of any IPR application to the documents listed in the charter ? will you allow this group proposing its royalty free protocol ?
> IPR disclosure is required as soon as a contribution is posted -
> there is nothing special about WG adoption in that respect.
> Also, each WG makes its own decisions about whether any
> disclosed IPR is a problem or not; that's a consensus matter,
> not an AD choice.
Exactly.

I would like to draw to the attention of the 
draft-jiang-config-negotiation-protocol, 
draft-pritikin-bootstrapping-keyinfrastructures, and 
draft-behringer-autonomic-control-plane draft authors that IPR 
declarations are required, and that IPRs might be an important factor in 
a WG creation.
Actually, this message is valid for all draft authors.

Regards, Benoit
>
>     Brian
> .
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email