Re: Issue found in RFC 3667 text

Pekka Savola wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
>>My proposal from yesterday was:
>>
>>"Any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which the author(s) are
>>reasonably and personally aware have been or will be disclosed, and any
>>of which they become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668."
>>
>>Any better suggestions?
> 
> 
> Yes; keep it as is, but fix the IPR note procedures.

Pekka, that isn't the answer. You have no concept of how long it takes
to negotiate the fine details of disclosures with corporate lawyers.
Fixing the way the IETF handles incoming notices is not the point.

If you want critical documents to be submitted before the I-D cutoff
date, there has to be some wiggle room here. The boilerplate above
provides that wiggle room. The boilerplate that slipped into 3667
does not do so and is therefore not an example of running code. My
mistake for not noticing it at Last Call, but it isn't in the spirit
of the discussions in the former WG.

    Brian

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