Re: [dane] AD review of draft-ietf-dane-smime-14

Thank you.
W

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Stephen Farrell
<stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
>
> Hiya,
>
> Thanks for checking. As I didn't see any objections, I've
> asked for IETF LC to be started.
>
> Cheers,
> S.
>
> On 13/02/17 17:32, Warren Kumari wrote:
>> Dear WG.
>>
>> Unless you explicitly let us know that you are NOT OK with the current
>> IPR declaration ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2468/ ) by
>> Thursday, we will be progressing the document.
>> Personally I'm not thrilled with the situation, but I don't really
>> think there is anything we can do about it...
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Marc Groeneweg <Marc.Groeneweg@sidn.nl> wrote:
>>>>>> the IPR declaration's statement that licensing information
>>>>>> will be provided "later."
>>>> As we had with the keyrelay draft in regext (and the draft of Peter Koch with DNSSEC transfers).
>>>
>>> Can you remind us what ended up happening with those two? I vaguely
>>> remember some discussion about it being hard to get a commitment, and
>>> that "later" seemed like a DoS on the process, but was there ever a
>>> resolution?
>>>
>>> Is the WG OK with this, or do you feel that we need to try and get the
>>> IPR statement updated? (Remembering that, AFAIK, we cannot do anything
>>> other than ask nicely...)
>>>
>>> W
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <SNAP/>
>>>>
>>>>> I see that Verisign has offered a free-unless-you-sue-us license for
>>>>> other patent applications, like this one, dunno why they do for some
>>>>> but not others:
>>>>>
>>>>>    https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2703/
>>>> Other than that the suggested draft is also by Verisign themselves?
>>>>
>>>>> In any event, you alrady know what my suggested solution is.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Marc
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> dane mailing list
>>>> dane@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
>>> idea in the first place.
>>> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
>>> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
>>> of pants.
>>>    ---maf
>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf