IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Issue found in RFC 3667 text

sob@harvard.edu (Scott Bradner) Wed, 28 April 2004 03:22 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20631 for <ipr-wg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:22:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIfag-00023L-FL for ipr-wg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:18:30 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i3S3IU8Y007887 for ipr-wg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:18:30 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIfW4-0001RJ-MD for ipr-wg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:13:44 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20195 for <ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:13:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIfW0-0001dE-Hw for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:13:40 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIfTK-0001Hj-00 for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:10:58 -0400
Received: from [65.246.255.50] (helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIfQQ-0000fu-00 for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 23:07:54 -0400
Received: from optimus22.ietf.org ([132.151.6.22] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1BIfB1-0006i0-Vn for ipr-wg-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:52:00 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIf7B-0006xt-MY; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:48:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BIf4m-0006hC-2X for ipr-wg@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:45:32 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA18861 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:45:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BIf4g-0004zi-KA for ipr-wg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:45:26 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BIf3k-0004rD-00 for ipr-wg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:44:29 -0400
Received: from newdev.eecs.harvard.edu ([140.247.60.212] helo=newdev.harvard.edu) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BIf2z-0004Zw-00 for ipr-wg@ietf.org; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:43:41 -0400
Received: by newdev.harvard.edu (Postfix, from userid 501) id 700681CB1CB; Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:43:01 -0400 (EDT)
To: fred@cisco.com, sob@harvard.edu
Subject: Re: Issue found in RFC 3667 text
Cc: ipr-wg@ietf.org, jorge.contreras@haledorr.com, rbarr@cisco.com
In-Reply-To: <200404280149.SAA04765@irp-view7.cisco.com>
Message-Id: <20040428024301.700681CB1CB@newdev.harvard.edu>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:43:01 -0400
From: sob@harvard.edu
Sender: ipr-wg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipr-wg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: IPR-WG <ipr-wg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ipr-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60

the race condition was discussed in relationship to sec 6.2.1 but
I do not recall that it came up in relationship to the boilerplate
statement 

> I cannot file an IPR notice without a posted draft to file it
> concerning,

actually you can but it sure makes more sense when it points to an 
ID or RFC (but saying that Cisco patent 12345678 relates to the 
discussion currently under way in the foo working group is something 
that I think has been done before and would make sense to me
(though I'm not sure the disclosure template covers the case)

I'm not sure how serious an issue the race condition in the boilerplate
is since I think someone would be hardput to show bad intent if the
disclosure was filed at the same time or within a day or so of 
the ID being sent in  (Jorge maybe you can comment)

Scott

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email