Re: RFC3979bis section 7 -- hierarchy of preference for licensing

[Thomas Narten <[e-mail]>]

I wasn't able to attend the Berlin session. Can you please remind us
of what problem the suggested text is intended to fix? I.e., what is
broken that needs fixing?

If the intent is to just to make clear that Non-assert is more
friendly to open source, and thus a preferance over simple RF, that is
one thing, and I think is closer to where the IETF is today than the
current RFC text.

On the other hand, I'm less sure that spelling out a heirarchy is
something we should (or need to) do. For one thing, it's not a
straight hierarchy.  IPR disclosures tend to have pesky reciprocity
clauses, which mean that something like a specific RAND license may
well be viewed as better (by some folks) than something "above it" in
the heirarchy. It all depends on the specific clauses, which have to
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and vary quite widely today.

Thomas