Re: [CDNi] New version (and IPR statement) of draft-brandenburg-cdni-uri-signing-for-has

Hello,

As an individual, I am in favour of adopting draft-brandenburg-cdni-uri-signing-for-has as a Working Group document.

This is based on the assumption that https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2806/ replaces https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2652/.

Cheers

Francois

> On 11 Jun 2016, at 20:56, Kevin Ma J <kevin.j.ma@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
>  
>   (As a chair) Per the decision in BA (https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/95/minutes/minutes-95-cdni <https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/95/minutes/minutes-95-cdni>), we deferred discussion of whether to (re)adopt draft-brandenburg-cdni-uri-signing-for-has as a WG item.  For historical context, in Prague, we decided to separate the IPR encumbered portion of URI signing from the WG draft (https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/minutes/minutes-93-cdni <https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/minutes/minutes-93-cdni>).
>  
>   There is a new IPR disclosure (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2806/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2806/>) available that folks should take a look at.  Note: I'm not sure if it should have been an update to the previous disclosure (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2652/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2652/>) or whether that makes a difference?  Alexey?
>  
>   If folks have thoughts about whether or not we should (re)adopt the HAS URI signing work, in light of the new IPR disclosure, please send your comments to the list.
>  
> thanx!
>  
> --  Kevin J. Ma
>  
> From: CDNi [mailto:cdni-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van
> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 11:34 AM
> To: cdni@ietf.org
> Subject: [CDNi] New version (and IPR statement) of draft-brandenburg-cdni-uri-signing-for-has
>  
> Hi all,
>  
> As you might have seen, I’ve recently uploaded a new version of draft-brandenburg-cdni-uri-signing-for-has (-03).
>  
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-brandenburg-cdni-uri-signing-for-has-03 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-brandenburg-cdni-uri-signing-for-has-03>
>  
> What is important to note is that KPN has updated it’s IPR statement on this document to be in line with the IPR statements that have been filed on other CDNI documents (i.e. “Royalty-Free, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory License to All Implementers”). Hopefully this clears up the lengthy IPR discussion we’ve been having around this document so that we can focus on the technical aspects again.
>  
> Looking forward to your feedback,
> Ray
>  
> This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CDNi mailing list
> CDNi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cdni