Issue found in RFC 3667 text

fred@cisco.com Wed, 28 April 2004 04:13 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA22986 for <ipr-wg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:13:47 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIgPI-0000hr-1E for ipr-wg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:10:48 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i3S4AmRp002711 for ipr-wg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:10:48 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIgNG-0000CY-49 for ipr-wg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:08:42 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA22663 for <ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:08:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIgNB-0003TF-Mw for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:08:37 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIgMT-0003Hd-00 for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:07:53 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIgLb-00035G-00 for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:06:59 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIgCv-0006Rx-4G; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:58:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIeET-0000eh-61 for ipr-wg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:51:29 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA16613 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:51:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: fred@cisco.com
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIeEO-0005La-8y for ipr-wg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:51:24 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIeDP-0005EV-00 for ipr-wg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:50:24 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] helo=sj-iport-2.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIeD7-00057V-00 for ipr-wg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:50:05 -0400
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (171.71.177.237) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Apr 2004 18:01:25 +0000
Received: from irp-view7.cisco.com (irp-view7.cisco.com [171.70.65.144]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i3S1nYC1017258; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 18:49:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (fred@localhost) by irp-view7.cisco.com (8.8.8-Cisco List Logging/CISCO.WS.1.2) id SAA04765; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 18:49:34 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 18:49:34 -0700
Message-Id: <200404280149.SAA04765@irp-view7.cisco.com>
To: sob@harvard.edu
Subject: Issue found in RFC 3667 text
Cc: ipr-wg@ietf.org, rbarr@cisco.com
Bc: fred
Sender: ipr-wg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipr-wg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: IPR-WG <ipr-wg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ipr-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60

Robert Barr and I were discussing, and concluded that there is an error
in the language required by section 5.1 of RFC 3667. Consider the
text:

   "By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
    patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
    and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance
    with RFC 3668."

I cannot file an IPR notice without a posted draft to file it
concerning, and this statement says that at the time I post it I have
already revealed all IPR known to me. In communication protocol design,
we refer to this as a "race condition."

There is also another issue with it; IPR is generally not granted for
years after filing, the contents of the filing are confidential, and
one doesn't know what subset of the claims in the filing will be
granted. So this, I believe, requires me to not file an internet draft
describing any algorithms concerning which I may have filed for IPR
claims until those claims have been granted or denied and I can talk
about my IPR.

The claim is also inconsistent with RFC 3668, which states:

6.2.1.  Timing of disclosure under Section 6.1.1

   The IPR disclosure required pursuant to section 6.1.1 must be made
   as soon as reasonably possible after the Contribution is published
   in an Internet Draft unless the required disclosure is already on
   file.

Is this what was intended?

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg