IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Second Last Call: <draft-ietf-sieve-notify-sip-message-08.txt> (Sieve Notification Mechanism: SIP MESSAGE) to Proposed Standard

Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com> Thu, 26 January 2012 23:06 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EE1A21F86DE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:06:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.561
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 ZGSxMwB1X5t7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:06:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com (wolverine01.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.254]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C53821F86DC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:06:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=presnick@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1327619164; x=1359155164; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc: subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:x-originating-ip; z=Message-ID:=20<4F21DC59.4040207@qualcomm.com>|Date:=20Th u,=2026=20Jan=202012=2017:06:01=20-0600|From:=20Pete=20Re snick=20<presnick@qualcomm.com>|User-Agent:=20Mozilla/5.0 =20(Macintosh=3B=20U=3B=20Intel=20Mac=20OS=20X=2010.6=3B =20en-US=3B=20rv:1.9.1.9)=20Gecko/20100630=20Eudora/3.0.4 |MIME-Version:=201.0|To:=20"Murray=20S.=20Kucherawy"=20<m sk@cloudmark.com>|CC:=20"ietf@ietf.org"=20<ietf@ietf.org> |Subject:=20Re:=20Second=20Last=20Call:=20<draft-ietf-sie ve-notify-sip-message-08.txt>=0D=0A=20(Sieve=20Notificati on=20Mechanism:=20SIP=20MESSAGE)=20to=20Proposed=20Standa rd|References:=20<20120125201714.3903.82295.idtracker@iet fa.amsl.com>=09<4F2075BE.5070201@nostrum.com>,=09<033901c cdbab$6bae0900$430a1b00$@olddog.co.uk>=09<CD5674C3CD99574 EBA7432465FC13C1B226F573BC9@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> ,=09<4F208AEF.5060406@qualcomm.com>=09<CD5674C3CD99574EBA 7432465FC13C1B226F573BCE@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>=09 <4F21ABF2.7040002@qualcomm.com>=20<6842.1327617385@maraja de.sandelman.ca>=20<F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A 7D9F5@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>|In-Reply-To:=20<F583327 3385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A7D9F5@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmar k.com>|Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3D"ISO-885 9-1"=3B=20format=3Dflowed|Content-Transfer-Encoding:=207b it|X-Originating-IP:=20[172.30.39.5]; bh=0UcoTBJSkDWggljEKHd4Hhgrjqjfmos9YQL3qJd0xhg=; b=ec/5lCriH4kRBd7wEA7GoBf8bcpl3RCAjUXl4DKQCubQY6LFsS11byLx uNSAa2oGnn4c++9iWCK8c41EJnDftuCBkyfoa3uq3Qa6/UzsYxBTW4AQB QAOY7x3tBdi4NYdRUclNrVBbDA4rcdzB2Aef2zt66fX0+ySh8mRrDSYOv g=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6601"; a="158240197"
Received: from ironmsg04-l.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.19]) by wolverine01.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 26 Jan 2012 15:06:04 -0800
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,574,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="154010674"
Received: from nasanexhc07.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.39.190]) by Ironmsg04-L.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 26 Jan 2012 15:06:04 -0800
Received: from Macintosh-4.local (172.30.39.5) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.190) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.339.1; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 15:06:03 -0800
Message-ID: <4F21DC59.4040207@qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:06:01 -0600
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
Subject: Re: Second Last Call: <draft-ietf-sieve-notify-sip-message-08.txt> (Sieve Notification Mechanism: SIP MESSAGE) to Proposed Standard
References: <20120125201714.3903.82295.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4F2075BE.5070201@nostrum.com>, <033901ccdbab$6bae0900$430a1b00$@olddog.co.uk> <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B226F573BC9@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>, <4F208AEF.5060406@qualcomm.com> <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B226F573BCE@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com> <4F21ABF2.7040002@qualcomm.com> <6842.1327617385@marajade.sandelman.ca> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A7D9F5@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
In-Reply-To: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A7D9F5@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.39.5]
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 23:06:10 -0000

On 1/26/12 4:45 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
>> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 2:36 PM
>> To: ietf@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: Second Last Call:<draft-ietf-sieve-notify-sip-message-
>> 08.txt>  (Sieve Notification Mechanism: SIP MESSAGE) to Proposed
>> Standard
>>
>> At this point, I do not have a clear idea of what the set of outcomes
>> could be.  I think that they can include:
>>     1) not publishing the document.
>>     2) revising the document to remove/work-around the encumbered work
>>      

Yes, certainly those are choices.

>>     3) some legal action to attend to anul the patent (which might or
>>        might not succeed).
>>      

I don't think this is something that we can do *as the IETF*. Certainly 
others are welcome to pursue that.

>>     4) go ahead and publish things as they are.
>>      
> I also thought about suggesting a DNP or a standing DISCUSS or something until the license terms are made more IETF-friendly, unless the WG can find a way to do equivalent work that is unencumbered, but then the WG might not have the energy left.
>
> The document could be restricted to Experimental status, but that presumes the status matters as much as or more than the RFC number.  I don't know if that's true or not in this case.
>    

These are also choices.

> Those only cover the document though, and not the offender(s).  Still chewing on an opinion about that.
>    

Other choices that involve both the document and the author(s) are 
similar to ones outlined by other folks:

- The author of the patent can be removed from the author list at the 
top of the document.
(In effect, this would be the IETF asking the WG chair to fire the 
document editor for failure to comply with IETF process. The result 
would be the author not getting the recognition as a document editor, 
though they would still appear in the Acknowledgments section.)

- Removal of posting rights of the author from the WG or IETF mailing 
lists, even perhaps via a PR Action for being "disruptive" of the IETF 
process.

Coincidentally, but not by chance, Adrian and I have been working on a 
draft to discuss such sanctions that we are just about to post. I hope 
that sparks some ideas as well.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email