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

"Jiankang YAO" <yaojk@cnnic.cn> Mon, 24 December 2012 03:52 UTC

Return-Path: <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
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 A3E9121F8BDE for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:52:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -98.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-98.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.092, BAYES_40=-0.185, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, 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 TzT3NSH3ZwmA for <dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:52:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cnnic.cn (smtp.cnnic.cn [159.226.7.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BEB6221F8BD7 for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Dec 2012 19:52:49 -0800 (PST)
X-EYOUMAIL-SMTPAUTH: yaojk@cnnic.cn
Received: from unknown127.0.0.1 (HELO lenovo47e041cf) (127.0.0.1) by 127.0.0.1 with SMTP; Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:52:39 +0800
Message-ID: <E6B15C370545406B86B8B615D7E2178C@LENOVO47E041CF>
From: Jiankang YAO <yaojk@cnnic.cn>
To: dnsop@ietf.org, patentlicensing@verisign.com, SM <sm@resistor.net>
References: <20121206172011.28125.12963.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20121206110336.09bf23a8@resistor.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 11:55:52 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
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: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 03:52:50 -0000

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "SM" <sm@resistor.net>
To: <dnsop@ietf.org>; <patentlicensing@verisign.com>
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>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 3:13 AM
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


> 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?
> 

I am interested in this question too since rfc4641bis and rfc4641 share a lot of points.

Jiankang Yao
> Regards,
> -sm 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DNSOP mailing list
> DNSOP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop