Status of a disclosure when technology is removed from a draft?

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 26 April 2013 19:44 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A77D21F96E0 for <ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7j1b99F5Ohe6 for <ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com (mail-pa0-f48.google.com [209.85.220.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF9A621F968B for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id lb1so750680pab.21 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent :mime-version:to:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sB53ilWETK2SkyZOKg1+LNJmBXjtKG2g+NKmvmM+oJo=; b=ZEIxlIlBlKJWu+Ud/xgWNmt1WrBYXd90qMGhYwBqpw1xSg8V1UwPeopsxZdrrl38BL OrZYlUxhGQzX9yZ8Mky4ed5Dby4baCLbkf6uU2xxusNSq5CfvlvUhkYw1mpOJxXRFgzN A7JjCM/m66AObKtIjVvsQMo3T/CUpZ05iSI44Sr84wRdY2n1hw+H2qJJOOirnibegg7Q 8KpjS8kU7zTLmNOSZlUEcOnTg6wc5J6kQYRYF08hwzkMI5KPm3lFievI1oYnhKZmD3zL m3WVZOT2sdI0bwkIxQe6ganEGHr4m1uPMeiLMoSMC3mUEQ83fu8OgKpYsWnI5audGxE4 Co4A==
X-Received: by 10.68.99.226 with SMTP id et2mr60190301pbb.91.1367005475630; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.64] (122-60-170-151.jetstream.xtra.co.nz. [122.60.170.151]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id at4sm12808281pbc.40.2013.04.26.12.44.32 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Apr 2013 12:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <517AD92C.6070400@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 07:44:44 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IPR ex-WG <ipr-wg@ietf.org>
Subject: Status of a disclosure when technology is removed from a draft?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 19:44:36 -0000

Hi,

A case has just occurred of the following sequence:

1. A draft is posted that contains an algorithm;
2. A corresponding IPR disclosure is posted;
3. After WG discussion, the draft is updated with the algorithm removed.

What next? The IPR disclosure is still there. Normally, we assume
that the disclosure remains relevant to following versions of the
draft without being re-posted each time. (In fact, do we even expect
a repeat disclosure for the eventual RFC? I don't think so.)

Is there a need for a formal rule for this case?

And what should the IPR holder do now? If they do nothing, the
updated draft might be assumed to be encumbered.

(FYI the draft is draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing
and the disclosure is https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2060/ .)

    Brian