Re: [conex] Last Call: <draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses-04.txt> (ConEx Concepts and Use Cases) to Informational RFC

Hi,

Bob's email specifically said specifications and mechanisms would be 
likely to be tagged with the IPR. This particular document is neither a 
specification nor a mechanism as it describes the use cases for conex. 
When the drafts describing the conex spec are sent to the IESG, the IPR 
claim will be propely pointed out.

I hope this clarifies the issue.

Regards, marcelo

El 29/03/12 18:11, Christopher Morrow escribió:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 10:10 AM, The IESG<iesg-secretary@ietf.org>  wrote:
>> The IESG has received a request from the Congestion Exposure WG (conex)
>> to consider the following document:
>> - 'ConEx Concepts and Use Cases'
>>   <draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses-04.txt>  as an Informational RFC
>>
>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>> ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-04-12. Exceptionally, comments may be
>> sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
>> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>
>> Abstract
>>
>>
>>    This document provides the entry point to the set of documentation
>>    about the Congestion Exposure (ConEx) protocol.  It explains the
>>    motivation for including a ConEx marking at the IP layer: to expose
>>    information about congestion to network nodes.  Although such
>>    information may have a number of uses, this document focuses on how
>>    the information communicated by the ConEx marking can serve as the
>>    basis for significantly more efficient and effective traffic
>>    management than what exists on the Internet today.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The file can be obtained via
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses/
>>
>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-conex-concepts-uses/ballot/
>>
>>
>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> Didn't Mr Briscoe just email that there was a BT IPR claim against
> this ID, related to re-ECN work he did/does for BT?
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> conex mailing list
>> conex@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/conex
> _______________________________________________
> conex mailing list
> conex@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/conex
>