IETF Logo Mail Archive

[dnssd] Further IPR disclosures on draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements-05 ?

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Thu, 12 March 2015 13:04 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: expand-draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements.all@virtual.ietf.org
Delivered-To: dnssd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 7F5421A00C5; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: xfilter-draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xfilter-draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements.all@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53AAD1A00C5; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:04:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.23
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 0qKkzgSG0QL9; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26A4D1A00DF; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:04:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t2CD4JBM004126; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:04:19 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk t2CD4JBM004126
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1426165460; bh=1JzC5rdvjuyNUPlI/n957kZMgKM=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=ZDms3ClZnnSNw3k+T6lNKRv5OP0KDduwLXe948QOUhpNftRV30MFI/5SfvFvB/Hsb w7I69CO51WTqFE2xZ97zTKRCSx68qROnk82w8kp7FFfjCk9wyL5l7KJtvI0FVUz+Cd rEtIvlx3wKtaDffrsAe66nLm5EeQlMRfgBr9yoWQ=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id r2BD4J1194707713BL ret-id none; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:04:19 +0000
Received: from [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f111:1c53:dbf6:34e2:c371] ([IPv6:2001:630:d0:f111:1c53:dbf6:34e2:c371]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t2CD4Gl4013894 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:04:17 GMT
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_76654316-F46E-46B4-8E5F-354662A28A46"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <64537593-69EF-43FA-8660-58812A265EFB@nominum.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:04:17 +0000
Message-ID: <EMEW3|4e17462205535732b1efd4c738f85d5cr2BD4J03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|A494098B-8360-4B79-BEDC-657A8B72F91C@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <20150312020708.27620.27985.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <64537593-69EF-43FA-8660-58812A265EFB@nominum.com> <A494098B-8360-4B79-BEDC-657A8B72F91C@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements.all@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=r2BD4J119470771300; tid=r2BD4J1194707713BL; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=3:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: t2CD4JBM004126
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnssd/VE6m6agrh3as24-zVkApAGD5yv4>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 06:05:06 -0700
Cc: dnssd-chairs@ietf.org, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Subject: [dnssd] Further IPR disclosures on draft-ietf-dnssd-requirements-05 ?
X-BeenThere: dnssd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of extensions to Bonjour \(mDNS and DNS-SD\) for routed networks." <dnssd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnssd/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnssd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd>, <mailto:dnssd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:04:31 -0000

Kerry, Stuart, Marc, Daniel,

Please can you confirm whether there is any additional IPR on the requirements draft as per Ted’s request below?

As per my other email just now, I understood that the IPR statement on the requirements draft (i.e.  https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2114/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2114/>) had intended to be on the hybrid solution draft (i.e. https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2119/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2119/> ).

Apologies for this extra late (hopefully small) hurdle.

Thanks,
Tim 

> On 12 Mar 2015, at 02:19, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mar 11, 2015, at 10:07 PM, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> wrote:
>>  The draft includes the boilerplate confirming that the document "is
>>  submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP
>>  79". No disclosures have been made, nor are expected to be made in an
>>  Informational requirements draft.
> 
> Argh, sorry, I didn't catch that.   Tim, please ask the authors to say explicitly whether they are aware of any additional IPR.   The boilerplate isn't adequate, because it is added by a tool, and is not present in the XML source.
> 
>> There was an IPR disclosure made on the earlier pre-WG version of this
>> document back in 2013. Were the authors asked whether that disclosure
>> also applies to this version of the document? Is the WG aware of this
>> disclosure? Did the WG discuss the disclosure? Were any concerns raised?
> 
> Hm.   This has certainly come up in meetings.   I think the only time it was mentioned on the mailing list was prior to the BoF that produced dnssd.   The disclosure has been in the tracker all along.   Are you suggesting that the working group may have agreed to advance the document without being aware of this, despite the IPR having been present in the tracker?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dnssd mailing list
> dnssd@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssd

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email