IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Geopriv] IPR disclosure on draft-ietf-geopriv-deref-protocol

"Carl Reed" <creed@opengeospatial.org> Fri, 20 July 2012 13:30 UTC

Return-Path: <creed@opengeospatial.org>
X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9514321F856F for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WefVHh4QDU9e for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.opengeospatial.org (scale.ogcinc.net [66.244.86.102]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06FF721F84F5 for <geopriv@ietf.org>; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.opengeospatial.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6841B94158; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 09:30:59 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.ogcinc.net
Received: from mail.opengeospatial.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (scale.ogcinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pS4VthEubHyD; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 09:30:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from OfficeHP (c-98-245-174-99.hsd1.co.comcast.net [98.245.174.99]) by mail.opengeospatial.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF6AF94155; Fri, 20 Jul 2012 09:30:58 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <5E129B22E02F447A865F939C74404575@OfficeHP>
From: Carl Reed <creed@opengeospatial.org>
To: Brian Rosen <br@brianrosen.net>, "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <B5972D72-AF7D-47C3-9F7D-E25332EE597A@bbn.com><EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE240AE8633@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <E2B47B28-5C47-4546-85B4-F9E0B1A892D3@brianrosen.net>
In-Reply-To: <E2B47B28-5C47-4546-85B4-F9E0B1A892D3@brianrosen.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 07:28:55 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308
Cc: geopriv@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] IPR disclosure on draft-ietf-geopriv-deref-protocol
X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy <geopriv.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv>
List-Post: <mailto:geopriv@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 13:30:04 -0000

Ditto. Proceed

Carl


-----Original Message----- 
From: Brian Rosen
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 7:22 AM
To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
Cc: geopriv@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] IPR disclosure on draft-ietf-geopriv-deref-protocol

Thanks for the reminder.

Based on the information available, I would say "proceed".

Brian

On Jul 20, 2012, at 5:50 AM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:

> Could I just point out that discussion of the validity, or not, of the 
> claims made in the declaration or in the claimed IPR itself are not 
> something the working group should be discussing.
>
> The WG merely needs to make a decision, based on the IPR declaration, and 
> the references therefrom, as to whether it should proceed with the current 
> technical solution, or to adopt an alternative technical solution (or no 
> solution at all).
>
> Saying "proceed" can encompass everything from "I don't believe the claims 
> are valid" to "The claims are valid but I am prepared to pay the license 
> fee to get this technical solution", but you don't need to tell the 
> working group any of that, particularly if it leads to a discussion of 
> whether your statement is correct or not.
>
> Regards
>
> Keith
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On 
>> Behalf
>> Of Richard L. Barnes
>> Sent: 19 July 2012 20:58
>> To: geopriv@ietf.org
>> Subject: [Geopriv] IPR disclosure on draft-ietf-geopriv-deref-protocol
>>
>> Dear GEOPRIV,
>>
>> An IPR disclosure has been filed against a GEOPPRIV document, draft-ietf-
>> geopriv-deref-protocol.  This document has been through working group 
>> last
>> call, IETF last call, and IESG approval.  Its last DISCUSS was cleared 12
>> July 2012, but Robert is delaying final approval until this IPR question
>> has been resolved.
>>
>> Please send comment to the list by Friday, 20 July 2012, if you have
>> concerns related to this IPR disclosure.
>>
>> Note that the patent disclosed in this disclosure was also disclosed with
>> regard to other GEOPRIV documents that proceeded to publication:
>> RFC 3693: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/960/>
>> RFC 4079: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/959/>
>> RFC 4119: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/958/>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> GEOPRIV Chairs
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geopriv mailing list
>> Geopriv@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email