Re: Last Call on draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-08.txt ("Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology")

Brian E Carpenter <> Wed, 13 April 2016 20:27 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80CA512E0A1 for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:27:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tvHNkQregMcM for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39A6E12DFDB for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id c20so38356656pfc.1 for <>; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:27:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:organization:to:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hLdB2fAPKgDNB7AGNEDaUwSn9xGDOE2+mJxXa+Ip2VQ=; b=LSihfL6IYAqka6pdfYviGQk1WI5Wic7sM0hkMpVFgMkjJwzKDmxp3h2i36HCIcfQoI wOoKWCuArYViUtdu3CKmnxLwnSjUTF5O9uiwLH5JCdUv3Op9D/barqBNXqTup2RFSYgh VMJCJKm3p9pGnFJoXhgaMdfp91WjzfXnkqxNTq8X2lJ1SEd5hVDNp+8sn04SpDrDJBIs mHTpxEuXpZB6QxVNDWFGerZc5cMNxsLXF7u+I6x8/MgXdAk/5D5cszTxGt3SnKa6SHSw DfuvlEtaT0X3yFJDFLMOgvhfHEAj8YIi5OjfSQc2PEJdHq2KhMFK1xxdXSx5GABVqdK4 L57Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:references:from:organization:to :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=hLdB2fAPKgDNB7AGNEDaUwSn9xGDOE2+mJxXa+Ip2VQ=; b=MHk72mK8UTV6By+372dhWQlb9oeos94F7Ej/eFmEdZcQqGbvnWDAp8/cylXJE290lk wSY4Uo8b0urfgE9fqqSg/XJai4eQtisQd+QtWp9S4WBuSUJfaLBqYCzboGhvHYYkVxOf lbQc+3/esV7NKiQxvu3DvAkLn+vhu6CjRc2uDMrpkWmVwFcFvFjE87y3EI0EshUSdqJj vl0PfuVm6gVZfGjzUSIVfXsVJMNqm2dgtX0tj1GA0Avihf2AsZQDZnIho9ygK9X37+k9 a79hilbMxrvPLHfA3+W08hZEOyNTOlgdvXYL6uAiUl+CuUIXrHvODQU2DB2Zv8aAisHH zYCw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXKP7rFZU0K0WlIvSUulKSIVze9F8us2thSscjZ+6SwpP0qGjS2Vh44snnlen2suA==
X-Received: by with SMTP id a28mr15591098pfj.145.1460579225808; Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:27:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:5576:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:5576:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by with ESMTPSA id d2sm13039074pfd.80.2016. for <> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:27:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Last Call on draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-08.txt ("Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology")
References: <> <> <>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Organization: University of Auckland
To: IETF <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 08:27:09 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
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: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 20:27:07 -0000

On 14/04/2016 08:04, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> Which is why most chairs, when trying to get a sense of the room on something, always ask the obverse question, and sometimes even ask "how many people don't care." 

I've also heard "who is abstaining?" and even "who is not listening?".

I think what John is getting at (please correct me if I'm wrong) is
individuals who have influenced the draft behind the scenes but stay
silent in public. Whether they are in the room is a little beside the

On 14/04/2016 08:06, Stephan Wenger wrote:
> Hi John and Mike,
> "Strong sense of the room that active influence counts as participation,
> but listening and watching does not."

Fair enough - but that doesn't mean that the IETF condones non-disclosure.
And (for the topic originally under discussion) it's clear that a WG Chair
who declares consensus for adopting a document, or forwards it to the IESG
for publication, or an AD who reviews a document prior to an IESG ballot, is
participating. If the text doesn't make that clear to all readers, the text
is defective.