Re: Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-ipr-sanctions-05.txt> (Sanctions Available for Application to Violators of IETF IPR Policy) to Informational RFC

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi Yoav,
At 00:44 09-05-2012, Yoav Nir wrote:
>What the IETF writes in its policy amounts to a plea to users to 
>pretty please send only factual information. I don't know that it 
>makes a difference as to who is liable if the information turns out 
>to be non-factual.

Section 3 text mentions several paths for the issue, i.e. 
responsibility lies with the working group chair with escalation to 
area directors.  Paragraph 2 and 3 discusses about that.  The issue 
which predates this draft is mentioned in the message at 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg71484.html

Do you know any IETF participant who is dumb enough to send a public 
request for sanctions? :-)  That can affect the individual's carrier 
path in the IETF and in the corporate world.  Some IETF participants 
might even ask lawyers to take action.  Watching "Behind enemy lines" 
(disambiguation required) might be instructive in this context.

At the end of the day, this draft is simply a matter of having an RFC 
for those who might find the information helpful.  Sometimes all one 
can do is to say "pretty please".

I'll +1 this draft as it stands.

Regards,
-sm