Re: [nvo3] Poll on progressing draft-ietf-nvo3-encap with missing IPR declaration

Dear WG Chairs, et al.,
I support progressing this document. I think that Option 1 is the
reasonable way forward out of this situation.

Regards,
Greg

On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 5:51 AM Bocci, Matthew (Nokia - GB) <
matthew.bocci@nokia.com> wrote:

> NVo3 WG,
>
>
>
> The chairs believe there is consensus to publish draft-ietf-nvo3-encap as
> an informational RFC. However, we are missing an IPR declaration from one
> of the co-authors listed in the Contributors section.
>
>
>
> Despite repeated attempts to contact them over several weeks through
> multiple channels, we have not received an IPR declaration. It is incumbent
> upon us to ask every author and contributor to declare whether they are
> aware of any IPR that may be applicable to the draft. However, since we
> have not been unable to contact this one co-author, we would like the
> working group’s input on how to proceed by responding to this poll.
>
>
>
> These are the potential options:
>
>
>
>    1. Remove the individual’s name from the list of contributors, moving
>    it to the acknowledgements section, and then request publication of the
>    draft.
>    2. Proceed with publication of the draft regardless, with no changes
>    to the contributors list.
>    3. Do not publish the draft until we receive a response form the
>    individual (which may be never).
>
>
>
> Please respond to this poll by Friday 22nd July stating whether you
> support option (1), option (2) or option (3).
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Matthew and Sam.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nvo3 mailing list
> nvo3@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
>