Re: [mpls] IPR poll for draft-ietf-mpls-1stnibble

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Tony, WG Chairs,

I apologize!

It took me a couple of re-reads of the mail I sent before I understood
your response.

I assume you responded because I wrote "The chairs have not yet discussed
this...". That is a typo, some would "a Freudian typo", I meant to say
"The authors have not yet discussed this..."

Sorry, for implying that the chairs were at fault when that was not the
case.

You are right that chairs should not gate progress, but I believe that
version -04 of the 1stnibble draft is not in shape to go into a WGLC.
The entire IANA section needs to be replaced. Why would we want to start
a WGLC that we know will fail?

/Loa

>
> Hi Loa,
>
> AFAIK, there is no reason for the chairs to gate progress.  If content
> changes are required, that’s up to the authors and the WG.
>
> Tony
>
>
>> On Apr 21, 2024, at 1:27 AM, Loa Andersson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Working Group,
>>
>>
>> I'm a bit reluctant to respond to this, but decided to do so.
>>
>> I'm not aware of any relevant IPRs against this draft.
>>
>> The reason I'm reluctant is that I don't think the draft is ready for
>> WGLC, and that the changes in any other case would be of such magnitude
>> that a new IPR poll would be needed.
>>
>> In this case, and since I hope we will converge on well-established IANA
>> registry types, there should be no IPR problems.
>>
>> The background is that we had prepared a slide deck for IETF 119,
>> including a slide that said the draft was ready for WGLC.
>>
>> The "bummer" was that the draft included an IANA registry, which IANA
>> told
>> us they could not produce. They gave us alternatives that should meet
>> our requirements.
>>
>> The chairs have not yet discussed this, I'd like to do that, before
>> bringing the discussion to the working group mailing list.
>>
>> I have tried to trigger that initial discussion.
>>
>> /Loa
>>
>>
>>> Working Group, authors,
>>> We are preparing draft-ietf-mpls-1stnibble for the Working Group last
>>> call.
>>> This email starts an IPR poll on the draft.
>>> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-mpls-1stnibble?
>>> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
>>> (see
>>> RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details)?
>>> Currently, there are no IPR disclosures against
>>> draft-ietf-mpls-1stnibble.
>>>
>>> If you are listed as a document author or contributor, please respond
>>> to
>>> this email regardless of whether you are aware of any relevant IPR.
>>> The response needs to be sent to the MPLS WG mailing list.
>>>
>>> The document will not advance to the next stage until a response has
>>> been
>>> received from each author and contributor. We expect responses from the
>>> authors below listed on the document:
>>>
>>> Kireeti Kompella
>>> Stewart Bryant
>>> Matthew Bocci
>>> Greg Mirsky
>>> Loa Andersson
>>> Jie Dong
>>> If you are on the MPLS WG email list but are not listed as an author or
>>> contributor, then please explicitly respond only if you are aware of
>>> any
>>> IPR that has not yet been disclosed in conformance with IETF rules.
>>> Regards,
>>> Tarek (as MPLS WG chair)
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Loa Andersson
>> Senior MPLS Expert
>> Bronze Dragon Consulting
>> [e-mail]
>> [e-mail]
>>
>>
>
>


-- 
Loa Andersson
Senior MPLS Expert
Bronze Dragon Consulting
[e-mail]
[e-mail]