Re: [Fecframe] I-D Action: draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-04.txt

"Luby, Michael" <luby@qti.qualcomm.com> Wed, 17 October 2012 15:58 UTC

Return-Path: <luby@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: fecframe@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: fecframe@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645A821F857D for <fecframe@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:58:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 5U2ZluUSeoWr for <fecframe@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sabertooth01.qualcomm.com (sabertooth01.qualcomm.com [65.197.215.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D92C21F8550 for <fecframe@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6867"; a="414856"
Received: from ironmsg03-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.17]) by sabertooth01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 17 Oct 2012 08:45:32 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,601,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="352878007"
Received: from nasanexhc06.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.21]) by Ironmsg03-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 17 Oct 2012 08:58:48 -0700
Received: from NASANEXD02C.na.qualcomm.com ([169.254.6.25]) by nasanexhc06.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.21]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:58:48 -0700
From: "Luby, Michael" <luby@qti.qualcomm.com>
To: Martin Stiemerling <martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu>, "Luby, Michael" <luby@qti.qualcomm.com>
Thread-Topic: [Fecframe] I-D Action: draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-04.txt
Thread-Index: AQHNpiEgQHxRRh+VfUSBSAt8xaBu5Je0bsiAgAlJxYCAAC5EgP//p0cAgACOoAD//5eZAA==
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:58:47 +0000
Message-ID: <BAE0CC0CAB9C9C4AAE57C71E55C451D820BD2311@NASANEXD02C.na.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <507ECADA.5010809@neclab.eu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.4.120824
x-originating-ip: [10.222.89.74]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <7F74A03822E38447A2D7A38962701312@qualcomm.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Mathieu Cunche <mathieu.cunche@inria.fr>, =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me_Lacan?= <jerome.lacan@isae.fr>, "fecframe@ietf.org" <fecframe@ietf.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [Fecframe] I-D Action: draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc-04.txt
X-BeenThere: fecframe@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of FEC Framework <fecframe.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/fecframe>, <mailto:fecframe-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/fecframe>
List-Post: <mailto:fecframe@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:fecframe-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fecframe>, <mailto:fecframe-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 15:58:50 -0000

Thanks Martin, 
I didn't know there was an open question, but I'm happy to hear that it is
addressed.
Best, Mike

On 10/17/12 8:12 AM, "Martin Stiemerling" <martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu>;
wrote:

>Hi Michael and Vincent, all,
>
>On 10/17/2012 03:41 PM, Luby, Michael wrote:
>> Vincent, You are welcome.  Responses below. Best, Mike
>>
>> On 10/17/12 4:59 AM, "Vincent Roca" <vincent.roca@inria.fr>; wrote:
>>
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your feedback.
>[...]
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> More importantly. Since:
>>>
>>> 1- you noticed we impose restrictions on the way LDPC-Staircase
>>> codes are being used in section 4.1;
>>>
>>> 2- you certainly remember the discussion we had in 2009 concerning
>>> 10 out of the 13 patents mentioned in the RFC5170 IPR disclosure,
>>> whose conclusion is here:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rmt/current/msg01384.html
>>>
>>> 3- the present I-D only considers LDPC-Staircase codes whereas
>>> RFC5170 defines two FEC schemes;
>>>
>>> you will probably conclude like us that QC's IPR disclosure for
>>> RFC5170 does not necessarily apply to this I-D. Hence our
>>> question: does QC intend to do a new IPR disclosure? When?
>>
>> *** This specification inherits technology from RFC 5170, and we
>> have made IPR declarations with regards to RFC 5170.  As far as I
>> know, we do not plan to make any further IPR declarations on this
>> specification.
>
>My open points are addressed, i.e., my question of the IPR declarations
>for RFC 5170 and any potential relationship to draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc.
>
>I will go forward with draft-ietf-fecframe-ldpc and ship it off to the
>RFC editor.
>
>Thank you!
>
>   Martin
>
>-- 
>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