IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Normatively referenced specifications

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Wed, 18 December 2013 18:27 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B45D1AE146 for <ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:27:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qBCYR9vdy1kH for <ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:27:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28D151AE108 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:27:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.66] (76-218-9-215.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.9.215]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rBIIRTqK015023 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:27:33 -0800
Message-ID: <52B1E8C7.90400@dcrocker.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:26:15 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, "Dale Mohlenhoff (dmohlenh)" <dmohlenh@cisco.com>, SM <sm@resistor.net>, "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>
Subject: Re: Normatively referenced specifications
References: <CED46C85.AC4EC%stewe@stewe.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20131217001052.0c5bff98@resistor.net> <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE712026ECD3A9B@MX15A.corp.emc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131218001051.0c266ed0@resistor.net> <CED70C71.119D0%dmohlenh@cisco.com> <52B1CF27.3010905@joelhalpern.com> <52B1DE0C.8010201@dcrocker.net> <52B1E6F0.5060808@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <52B1E6F0.5060808@joelhalpern.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:27:33 -0800 (PST)
Cc: "ipr-wg@ietf.org" <ipr-wg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 18:27:38 -0000

On 12/18/2013 10:18 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> THe part that is relevant to this discussion are the IPR licensing terms
> stated by folks in conjunction with our policy.
> And yes, they can make broader grants about other specifications when
> they provide those licenses, but from an IETF perspective what folks
> look at, and what we are discussing, is the licensing terms for use in
> the specification.


Whereas I read the challenging part of this discussion as having to do 
with requirements for disclosure.  Certainly the assertions in the 
thread that gave me pause were ones that claimed clever, nuanced 
interpretations of our rules in order to avoid disclosure.

Once IPR is disclosed, how the IETF chooses to deal with that 
information might indeed get complicated, nuanced or whatever.

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email