Re: I-D Action: draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-06.txt

Hi,

A couple of points on this version:

1. In section 7 (Evaluating Alternative Technologies in IETF Working Groups):

> For example, if	
> technologies are being considered for a mandatory-to-implement change	
> to a widely deployed protocol, the hurdle should be very high for	
> encumbered technologies, whereas a similar hurdle for a new protocol	
> could conceivably be lower.

If we're going into that much detail in the BCP, we have to nitpick it.
For example, the last phrase should probably be:

  whereas a similar hurdle for a new protocol or an optional extension
  could conceivably be lower

2. On the face of it I don't have any serious problems with the latest
changes. However, I think we need to see a layman's explanation of
the practical effect of all the changes compared to RFC 3979. At the
monent, I couldn't complete the sentence "We are updating RFC 3979 in
order to ...".

    Brian

Regards
   Brian Carpenter
   http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7924-6182

On 12/10/2013 04:49, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> 
> 
> 	Title           : Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology
> 	Author(s)       : Scott Bradner
>                           Jorge Contreras
> 	Filename        : draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-06.txt
> 	Pages           : 20
> 	Date            : 2013-10-11
> 
> Abstract:
>    The IETF policies about Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), such as
>    patent rights, relative to technologies developed in the IETF are
>    designed to ensure that IETF working groups and participants have as
>    much information about any IPR constraints on a technical proposal as
>    possible.  The policies are intended to benefit the Internet
>    community and the public at large, while respecting the legitimate
>    rights of IPR holders.  This memo details the IETF policies
>    concerning IPR related to technology worked on within the IETF.  It
>    also describes the objectives that the policies are designed to meet.
>    This memo updates RFC 2026 and obsoletes RFC 3979 and RFC 4879.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bradner-rfc3979bis
> 
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-06
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-bradner-rfc3979bis-06
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> I-D-Announce mailing list
> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> 