IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [CCAMP] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-03: (with COMMENT)

"BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" <db3546@att.com> Thu, 19 November 2015 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <db3546@att.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA8D1B2B0D; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 06:58:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.262
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.262 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, KHOP_DYNAMIC=1.004, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=no
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 4W4l21V7_Ohn; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 06:58:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D48881B2AE6; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 06:58:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049297.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.15.0.59/8.15.0.59) with SMTP id tAJEn5sS033859; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:57:54 -0500
Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by m0049297.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 1y62j9y2ta-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:57:54 -0500
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tAJEvrBA018679; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:57:53 -0500
Received: from mlpi408.sfdc.sbc.com (mlpi408.sfdc.sbc.com [130.9.128.240]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tAJEvgH7018431 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:57:46 -0500
Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com (MISOUT7MSGHUBAF.itservices.sbc.com [130.9.129.150]) by mlpi408.sfdc.sbc.com (RSA Interceptor); Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:57:22 GMT
Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.5.240]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAF.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.150]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:57:22 -0500
From: "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" <db3546@att.com>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-03: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHRImfe+t5NLBkVOUySAInVH3d/vp6jbkPQ
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:57:22 +0000
Message-ID: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C852793150@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com>
References: <20151119011600.28344.90198.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20151119011600.28344.90198.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.70.7.117]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2015-11-19_09:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1507310000 definitions=main-1511190254
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/mXNKrE5n8dpe3dC0pdbXqrpgYAs>
Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext@ietf.org>, "ccamp-chairs@ietf.org" <ccamp-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:58:24 -0000

Hi Stephen,

Looking at the list archive, the disclosure is dated Aug. 4. And on Aug 5, one of the authors noted it and their best effort to disclose quickly when made aware of it:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/eafHJl4vR0UpINehuJ4yN1YVze4

Just before WG Last Call, as we do among my groups (trained well by our former AD), an IPR poll was done, and the IPR was noted. And during WG Last Call (dated Aug. 29), no concerns were raised.

And this is quite typical IPR for the Routing Area.

So not iccky:-)

Thanks for your concern-
Deborah



-----Original Message-----
From: iesg [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Farrell
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 8:16 PM
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext@ietf.org; ccamp-chairs@ietf.org; daniel@olddog.co.uk
Subject: Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-03: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


The IPR disclosure is dated one day after the date of the
current draft. That's kind of iccky in terms of the WG having
really had a chance to consider what they think of the IPR,
e.g. before a WGLC. Did the WG specifically consider this IPR
declaration in a way that left some trace?  (Sorry I've not had
time to check the list archive.)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email