Informed, slow-enough decisions (Re: Shuffle those deck chairs!)

Picking out a minor subthread from Paul's long and passionate thread:

--On onsdag, oktober 20, 2004 15:15:58 +0000 Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com> 
wrote:

> i don't agree that it shouldn't be allowed to be an rfc.  i do think the
> iesg/iab should think carefully about making something a proposed
> standard or draft standard or full standard without having first
> negotiated royalty-free use rights on behalf of all future implementors,
> as scrocker did with jbezos for the RSADSI IPR that went into early
> dnssec.

does anyone still remember draft-savola-ipr-lastcall-03.txt, now expired, 
which called for IETF Last Calls to include a listing of all relevant IPR 
claims filed?

this seemed like a reasonably obvious idea at the time, but we seem to have 
lost the token somewhere along the way....

Note to all those who think the IETF standards process is too slow:
Making it dependent on acceptable licensing conditions being negotiated 
will make it still slower. The current "IETF can proceed with consensus but 
without assurances" process is a direct result of encountering an IPR 
holder that did not reply to requests for licensing negotiations.

Sometimes, as with DNSSEC, delay is worth the result. Other times.....?

                         Harald

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf