Re: [Fecframe] AD question about IPRs on draft-ietf-fecframe-raptor-10

Hi Michael,

Ok, good to know!

Thanks

   Martin

On 04/20/2012 06:29 PM, Luby, Michael wrote:
> Just for information, only 1711 is relevant, all the others are obsolete.
> Also, 1711 exactly mirrors the IPR statements for RFC 5053 and RFC 6330
> (these are the original Raptor and RaptorQ specifications for object
> delivery developed in RMT).
>
> On 4/20/12 5:33 AM, "Martin Stiemerling"<martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> The draft-ietf-fecframe-raptor-10 is scheduled for the upcoming IESG
>> telechat on April 26th.
>>
>> And as your new Area Director I have a question about the WG's view on
>> the IPR. There are by today (April 20th) 4 IPR disclosures with respect
>> to this draft:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=document_search&id_documen
>> t_tag=draft-ietf-fecframe-raptor
>>
>> What is the opinion of the WG about those IPR disclosures? Is there any
>> disagreement to move the draft forward or are all fine with the current
>> state?
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>
>>    Martin
>>
>> --
>> IETF Transport Area Director
>>
>> martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu
>>
>> NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC Europe Limited
>> Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL
>> Registered in England 283
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fecframe mailing list
>> Fecframe@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe
>

-- 
IETF Transport Area Director

martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu

NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC Europe Limited
Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL
Registered in England 283