Re: Effective vs intended handling of patent encumbrance in IETF wg and IESG

Dear all:

If it may assist ipr wg participants in focusing on the wg issues, if 
any in the present discussion thread, here is a clarification:

The observations I made about draft-ietf-dnsext-rollover-requirements 
*are completely independent from* draft-moreau-srvloc-dnssec-priming, or 
the IPR disclosure for the latter.

Like Harald, I'm lost when reading comments suggesting otherwise.

Regards,

-- 

- Thierry Moreau

CONNOTECH Experts-conseils inc.
9130 Place de Montgolfier
Montreal, Qc
Canada   H2M 2A1

Tel.: (514)385-5691
Fax:  (514)385-5900

web site: http://www.connotech.com
e-mail: thierry.moreau@connotech.com

Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
> I must admit I'm lost here.
> 
> All the dates I can find are:
> 
> - November 20, 2006: draft-ietf-dnsext-rollover-requirements-04 published
> - February 26, 2007: draft-koch-dnsop-resolver-priming published
> - March 19, 2007: DNS resolver priming discussed in Prague @DNSOP
> - April 19, 2007: Patent request filed in Canada
> - April 20, 2007: draft-moreau-srvloc-dnssec-priming-00 is published
> - May 9, 2007: draft-moreau-srvloc-dnssec-priming-01 is published
> - May 10, 2007: Thierry Moreau informally discloses existence of IPR
> - June 5, 2007: Thierry Moreau formally discloses existence of patent 
> applciation
> 
> Unless time travel is involved, I cannot see any way the current 
> existence of the patent application filed in April 2007 can have 
> influenced the draft published in November 2006.
> 
> What have I failed to understand?
> 

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