RE: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-08

"Christian Huitema" <> Sun, 27 March 2016 23:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52AFF12D606 for <>; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.89
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL=0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L4=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zmeRdrbn1erm for <>; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:51:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8852612D603 for <>; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:51:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([] by with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <>) id 1akKSe-0007md-IM for; Sun, 27 Mar 2016 19:51:16 -0400
Received: (qmail 22709 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2016 23:51:10 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO huitema1) ([]) (envelope-sender <>) by (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <>; 27 Mar 2016 23:51:10 -0000
From: "Christian Huitema" <>
To: "'Jari Arkko'" <>, "'Brian E Carpenter'" <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 16:51:13 -0700
Message-ID: <013701d18883$8d04f260$a70ed720$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0
Thread-Index: AQHMc636XmRPnnfAp+jrXIMysYmjkwEGAq9sn2/roBA=
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: RE: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-08
Archived-At: <>
Cc: 'General Area Review Team' <>, 'IETF discussion list' <>,
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2016 23:51:20 -0000

Hash: SHA1

On Sunday, March 27, 2016 3:37 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
> Thanks for your review, Brian.
> The points you raise are good ones, and we need to deal with them
> somehow.

I would like to add another point to Brian's review. I am concerned that the "General Policy," as stated in section 3.1, does not really present the IETF consensus. The current text says:

   In all matters relating to Intellectual Property Rights, the intent
   is to benefit the Internet community and the public at large, while
   respecting the legitimate rights of others.

This is a bit misleading. The actual IETF approach is delineated in section 7, where it is explained that working group members are carefully weighting tradeoffs between the potential benefits of using a patented technology, and the potential impediments caused by licensing terms, or the uncertainty about licensing conditions. The purpose of early disclosure is to help working groups make informed decisions as early as possible, by opposition to investing a lot of effort on a particular design before learning about the IPR existence.

Pretty much the entire policy derives from that. So maybe it should be stated upfront!

- -- Christian Huitema

Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using gpg4o v3.5.53.6558 -
Charset: utf-8