Re: [mpls] WGLC for draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Wed, 24 May 2017 13:22 UTC

Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 931C5129B25; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:22:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ebyHdjyCrtIb; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22d.google.com (mail-oi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B99AC129B0D; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id w10so241471001oif.0; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+tOdzGLXxz57gI/dQWamsDBvGrMJ9NmiI8veeqT/2Rc=; b=pMMvZNrjxDQYD2+1wWeZ5wD7+PcA860g/LYtI91KZQaRchfcWjkogdDL5v5BNsf6eQ bvQV+SLL+5rF9NmPjLPwb9sd2zH61pHNADnlakEKctBMXUWJqhqJ62p0+NDMbk0WSxBv 8jXcx2NA9EffkuhCxLXcfIxbY9oBQFVIkkWpmer5csUFwi336KewHHjN2lmgwkbR5vjw PlLnKhHRFoEvHNAqyg21Xce/aagsZN54yB1JGb22jhj54h3bLtyG70uQCTeL+UyuNl0v swS7ACL+oN9HYuA/34pr+rFNnsLh5hCvW6hHkuxkU1mhFi26h/NCVj3RIo8BIPwzD2s3 EDhg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+tOdzGLXxz57gI/dQWamsDBvGrMJ9NmiI8veeqT/2Rc=; b=jc64GMCGgA1g9G741x+ss0tSX47nfKhnNM5YuJhuR7rC6gSuZVVZiiFf4nPw6btlRw cGs3i3ApD6kVbY4XLtJc69JqwT6cczy2FuPmNjgioRWjfNMIYji7RmKQlatH3Pg8XnOD CnEeRAAYLE8LGMhSjGZ31CRYmXroU9ft7qASyZj/HMePk5jHDr+DBV5bPjYhWyFokYlj i5oz0pdiZmX5HbCdrYnUbixev8q0KQDP52gxlPLE25m7z6g/11KwQvkjxiu7oT+ZsoBj /QXm1kyeSBrynjsDkXaGuMDpIIkuffwBpIkXElaaSw/mIWey/Ye+nmHgOo5ogcBtOlEW wzIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCokPWL/+cxMg/yjO7uIkSX0IIFl6tZu5A5/WryI60OwEdtEcqq b9hmUEITOfRhHwf++KNoWs8d5sHP3A==
X-Received: by 10.202.198.208 with SMTP id w199mr15389709oif.115.1495632146054; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:22:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.52.246 with HTTP; Wed, 24 May 2017 06:22:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <db3adc45477f4e44ac48f1fb449a1850@HE105662.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
References: <db3adc45477f4e44ac48f1fb449a1850@HE105662.emea1.cds.t-internal.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 21:22:25 +0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmX0bbha+GqOvePXfFawcDLL=oq88OOC3N_FrF46V2s=ew@mail.gmail.com>
To: "n.leymann@telekom.de" <N.Leymann@telekom.de>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, mpls-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1134fbb4c7c690055044fe82"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/i2cJdO-9t7t7Ahrs4d7yWFz5rZQ>
Subject: Re: [mpls] WGLC for draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 May 2017 13:22:38 -0000

Hi Nick,
I don't know of any IETF regulations or rules that prescribe to prevent
progressing a document based on type of IPR Disclosure. I'd note that
authors did their best to ensure that appropriate IPR Disclosures were
filed as soon as possible. I believe that there were no concerns regarding
timing of the IPR Disclosures related to earlier versions of the draft.

Regards,
Greg

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:33 PM, <N.Leymann@telekom.de>; wrote:

> Dear Working Group,
>
> The authors have updated draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed and think that the
> draft is ready for WGLC.
> Therefore this e-mail starts a WG LC which will end on the 7th of June.
>
> Please note that draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed did not pass the
> previous working group last call, because of an IPR disclosure:
>
>   *https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2892/*
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2892/>
>
> The authors have updated the draft and they believe that the IPR is no
> longer in scope.
> Please notify the list if you still think the IPR is an issue and please
> state if you think it
> is OK to continue with the publication of this document.
>
>   Best regards
>
>     Nic
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>