Re: Normatively referenced specifications

"Dale Mohlenhoff (dmohlenh)" <dmohlenh@cisco.com> Wed, 18 December 2013 16:45 UTC

Return-Path: <dmohlenh@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05B31AE426 for <ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 08:45:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.039
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.039 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L3RWmmdR1H5n for <ipr-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 08:45:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F05A1AE420 for <ipr-wg@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 08:45:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6673; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1387385102; x=1388594702; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=O00uHREIKryRdOFz3N5ei0bqW767ysiPhmdhGyMtCnU=; b=O6/f0u6l/1zgduI0om0BdQHt8CJ7yQ/y9IluKVPO0KtwSNHF73ImAqqB owaU50o+PtSb7gm8IJQkdhwjL6du5/f9F8BmCaRKf7fFMGx0PLmi7cvmO R4SzS/QeRoYkBo/5++sZ5aekObMjIGJvyRjGeBjgTFFj3lvYwqE5RYq9+ c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhgFAKTQsVKtJXHA/2dsb2JhbABWA4JpIThVuG6BGxZ0giUBAQEEAQEBNzQLEAIBCBgeECcLJQIEAQ0FiAQBDMosEwSOMBEBQBAHEYQlBJgWkhSDK4FxOQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,508,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="289401572"
Received: from rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com ([173.37.113.192]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 18 Dec 2013 16:45:00 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com [173.37.183.81]) by rcdn-core2-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rBIGj0N6025069 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:45:00 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com ([fe80::747b:83e1:9755:d453]) by xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com ([173.37.183.81]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:45:00 -0600
From: "Dale Mohlenhoff (dmohlenh)" <dmohlenh@cisco.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, SM <sm@resistor.net>, "Black, David" <david.black@emc.com>
Subject: Re: Normatively referenced specifications
Thread-Topic: Normatively referenced specifications
Thread-Index: AQHO+wYxlYjlcMiEV0WCDjCwJ+GX4JpZci0AgAAxHiCAAGKzgIAAh0SA//98JIA=
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:44:59 +0000
Message-ID: <CED70F91.119E3%dmohlenh@cisco.com>
References: <CED46C85.AC4EC%stewe@stewe.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20131217001052.0c5bff98@resistor.net> <8D3D17ACE214DC429325B2B98F3AE712026ECD3A9B@MX15A.corp.emc.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20131218001051.0c266ed0@resistor.net> <CED70C71.119D0%dmohlenh@cisco.com> <52B1CF27.3010905@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <52B1CF27.3010905@joelhalpern.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030
x-originating-ip: [10.21.71.98]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <36EAE38DC13A7C40A703C5DAD8260B38@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "ipr-wg@ietf.org" <ipr-wg@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipr-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 16:45:05 -0000

Hi Joel,

I agree and I obviously did not make my point clearly.  I agree with you
that IETF IPR declarations only apply to IETF specifications.  Further,
the declarations apply to IETF IPR specifications that are implemented in
conjunction with other specifications, however, the declarations will only
apply to the IETF specification and not to the other specifications.   I
also agree with you that if the IETF specification is modified in any way
when incorporated into another specification, then the IETF declarations
do not apply.  Sorry that I did not make this clear in my previous email.

Regards,
Dale
    
 
Dale G. Mohlenhoff 
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Senior Corporate Counsel                                           170
West Tasman Drive
                   
                   San Jose, CA  95134-1706
dmohlenh@cisco.com
Direct:     +1.408.525.9589
Mobile:   +1.509.991.6003
 
This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole
use of the intended recipient.  Any review, use, distribution or
disclosure by others is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended
recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the
sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message.






On 12/18/13 8:36 AM, "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:

>Dale, your interpretation is exactly the opposite of what I thought Dave
>was saying.
>Referencing a spec normally does not and ought not mean that the
>referencers IPR rules apply to the referenced specification.  They
>can't, since in the abstract the referencer has no control over the IPR
>grants of the referenced document.
>
>And IETF IPR grants apply when implementing IETF RFCs, even when those
>RFCs are implemented in conjunction with some other specification.  The
>IPR grants don't apply (as I understand it all bets are off) if you
>modify the spec.
>
>Equally, the IETF can not insist that our IPR rules apply to a spec we
>reference.
>
>Yours,
>Joel
>
>On 12/18/13 11:32 AM, Dale Mohlenhoff (dmohlenh) wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I agree with the comments made below.  I think it creates many concerns
>> when an IETF standard is incorporated into another standard and IETF's
>>IPR
>> declarations are expected to be applied.  Different organizations have
>> different IPR policies and IETF should not expect to rely on other
>> organizations IPR declarations if it were to incorporate another
>>standard
>> into its standards.  Likewise, other organizations should not
>>necessarily
>> be able to rely on IETF declarations if they incorporate an IETF
>>standard.
>>   In some cases this may be satisfactory, but not in every case.
>> Therefore, the policy should be for the appropriate declarations to be
>> made in the standards organization that has incorporated other
>>standards.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dale
>>
>>
>> Dale G. Mohlenhoff
>> Cisco Systems, Inc.
>> Senior Corporate Counsel                                           170
>> West Tasman Drive
>>
>>                     San Jose, CA  95134-1706
>> dmohlenh@cisco.com
>> Direct:     +1.408.525.9589
>> Mobile:   +1.509.991.6003
>>
>> This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged material for the
>>sole
>> use of the intended recipient.  Any review, use, distribution or
>> disclosure by others is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the
>>intended
>> recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact
>>the
>> sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/18/13 12:39 AM, "SM" <sm@resistor.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi David,
>>> At 15:43 17-12-2013, Black, David wrote:
>>>> I'm concerned - at an abstract level, this question appears to be
>>>> headed towards applying the IETF's IPR policy to standards developed
>>>> by other standards organizations by virtue of IETF documents
>>>> containing normative references to such standards.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> I suspect that the IETF could be rather uncomfortable being on the
>>>> receiving end of another standards organization doing that to
>>>> our standards (applying their IPR policy to IETF standards courtesy
>>>> of normative references in their standards).  I might suggest that
>>>> a useful criterion for application of IETF's IPR policy to a standard
>>>> developed by another organization could be (re)publication of that
>>>> document as an IETF standard (to which the IETF IPR policy would
>>>> then be clearly applicable).  There are situations in which the
>>>> same standard is published by IETF and another standards organization.
>>>
>>> The republication might cause other problems as you then have two
>>> specifications.  There may be a divergence between the two
>>> specifications in the far future.  As mentioned above the IETF might
>>> be uncomfortable if it was at the receiving end.
>>>
>>>> I will also observe that as a participant in multiple standards
>>>> organizations across which normative references and collaborative
>>>> standards development activity occurs, one IPR policy per organization
>>>> is quite enough to deal with ... really ;-).
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>>> OTOH, I do think that there is a problem in what you observed:
>>>>
>>>>> For what it is worth, I reviewed
>>>>> a draft from a working group in the RAI area
>>>>> recently.  The draft was written to address an
>>>>> interoperability problem affecting a
>>>>> technology.  The specification for that
>>>>> technology was not referenced.
>>>>
>>>> If I were reviewing that draft (e.g., as a Gen-ART reviewer), I would
>>>> have raised a major issue about the missing normative reference, as it
>>>> is clearly not possible to implement the improved interoperability
>>>> behavior for that technology without implementing the technology
>>>>itself.
>>>>
>>>> That reference, and especially the citation of the entity that
>>>>developed
>>>> the reference, ought to provide implementers who care with enough
>>>> direction to start to run down the relevant IPR considerations.
>>>
>>> I would list the issue as minor in an area-specific review if I need
>>> to read the referenced document to understand the draft being
>>> reviewed.  I agree with what is written above.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> -sm
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ipr-wg mailing list
>>> Ipr-wg@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ipr-wg mailing list
>> Ipr-wg@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg
>>