Re: [DNSOP] IPR Disclosure: VeriSign, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis-13 and draft-koch-dnsop-dnssec-operator-change-04

SM <sm@resistor.net> Thu, 06 December 2012 19:14 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0527021F8742 for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:14:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.633
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.633 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.034, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b70CpDeNR50n for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:14:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 560F221F8697 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:14:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qB6JEcum012910; Thu, 6 Dec 2012 11:14:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1354821288; bh=abG8O1bc2CyXz9vl0eiJUxdkId1T7fvAdQIYmqXKNNg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=ZS8HmvypsbteYtUCSeP1u2d5cpIRrNICcqTO+pr4HXyUYKcHzDZnPVncxwQuHayt4 fiDbFCO/nUeocSmoXI6eeqkaOjPCHFG5TJcjT7+QP5tyRGTwt6H6dQU1okg1EL5hPQ Vo/S/5wNpUOhH1idXrlguXD6xdsfNvpVoFtBGv2Q=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1354821288; i=@resistor.net; bh=abG8O1bc2CyXz9vl0eiJUxdkId1T7fvAdQIYmqXKNNg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=M6gWgTez/S9pr3+fXMI6rXUdQtOrn7DQI+DqEQkKvtxrTob4LbLLtD8z4blmDZNNE J10PQ3pdkWN8BU3W2U7mLUFBxSK7x/tLETE1bX5vsUV2TinMvlHysA4kDUDK+yZ0EL wtuhsgx1+xtWw/odWgbQjMEhTM0R12AAW9ctYdfw=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20121206110336.09bf23a8@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 11:13:49 -0800
To: dnsop@ietf.org, patentlicensing@verisign.com
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <20121206172011.28125.12963.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20121206172011.28125.12963.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: matthijs@nlnetlabs.nl, riwhite@verisign.com, rbonica@juniper.net, dnsop@ietf.org, pk@ISOC.DE, miek.gieben@sidn.nl, bclaise@cisco.com, sa.morris7@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] IPR Disclosure: VeriSign, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis-13 and draft-koch-dnsop-dnssec-operator-change-04
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 19:14:54 -0000

At 09:20 06-12-2012, IETF Secretariat wrote:
>  An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "DNSSEC
>Operational Practices, Version 2" (draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis) was 
>submitted to
>the IETF Secretariat on 2012-12-05 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of
>Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures"
>(https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1924/). The title of the IPR disclosure is
>"VeriSign, Inc.'s Statement about IPR related to 
>draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis-13
>and draft-koch-dnsop-dnssec-operator-change-04."");

The IPR disclosure at https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1924/ does not 
mention RFC 4641.  As draft-ietf-dnsop-rfc4641bis-13 is based on RFC 
4641, does the submitter believe that an IPR disclosure is required 
for RFC 4641?

Regards,
-sm