IETF 87 IPRbis BOF evaluation
Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Fri, 02 August 2013 08:52 UTC
Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EF6511E82DF; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 01:52:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.59
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.59 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 32QnbJyqfrB4; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 01:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from odin.smetech.net (mail.smetech.net [208.254.26.82]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06ED711E82F9; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 01:48:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [208.254.26.81]) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1711F24082; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 04:49:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smetech.net
Received: from odin.smetech.net ([208.254.26.82]) by localhost (ronin.smetech.net [208.254.26.81]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uHOrXlMX0sFW; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 04:48:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from v150.vpn.iad.rg.net (v150.vpn.iad.rg.net [198.180.150.150]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by odin.smetech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35062F24038; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 04:49:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-64--158351121"
Subject: IETF 87 IPRbis BOF evaluation
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 04:48:43 -0400
Message-Id: <FE6D23D3-BA71-4677-8699-44DBFD85DDE3@vigilsec.com>
To: IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, IAB IAB <iab@iab.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Cc: Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com>, IETF IPR WG <ipr-wg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IPR-WG <ipr-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipr-wg>
List-Post: <mailto:ipr-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 08:52:32 -0000
I attended the IPRbis BOF. The idea is to update the BCPs to incorporate experience from the last 8 years. Jorge Contreras and Scott Bradner had a list of proposed changes, and they were each discussed in turn. The discussion was much more calm than the discussion in Orlando, but this calmness did not allow review of all of proposed changes. As a result, the BOF ended without a real conclusion. By impression is that the I-D will be updated based on the ones that were discussed, and that discussion is needed on the remaining proposed changes. I'd recommend a thread on each proposed change on the ipr-wg@ietf.org so that there is a hope of getting this stuff done before the end of 2013. Russ
- IETF 87 IPRbis BOF evaluation Russ Housley
- Re: IETF 87 IPRbis BOF evaluation Scott Brim
- Re: IETF 87 IPRbis BOF evaluation Bradner, Scott
- Re: IETF 87 IPRbis BOF evaluation tsg
- Re: IETF 87 IPRbis BOF evaluation Scott O Bradner