Re: [paws] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-paws-protocol-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Gabor Bajko <gaborbajko@gmail.com> Thu, 21 August 2014 23:32 UTC

Return-Path: <gaborbajko@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C295A1A6F62; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:32:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 0oKnlMK8NsFd; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yk0-x231.google.com (mail-yk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 128EC1A6EF8; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yk0-f177.google.com with SMTP id 79so8181247ykr.8 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=y9P0F/hm5X9eZ7sD2rQ6vkUh5lr0WCrvAgPK+SmiSds=; b=SoWRntxkIU4XMePRPtun/U6S2xTOl8zV/pXIV9RbYTpQJOgFRVEqhaItBwiMQEJPg4 ux+vz9HSbo1WqFwqUjmUHZMbU12HzWThkF/nroEtVBdrudj6Z011Pi3caTy/zHF6zK56 0V7VxtemiToE2CbAUFO6hZ3EEj8mgYy8pQFLc6cCBcw/utgaIyPe7occaNSY9OG5zojb 04LIVs9hKI2DDMf/0/Etfw3ABXyHr7nAPIFMxxX6OVh8BYMz4qWwzQntRImfXGdT00Fd U1OPBlJDr3fRHlTSxc74pLuFzByvwaQ9Re+ld5PItDtILrG8pB7CnAgEGxjDOwYC02Pz TTEA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.65.133 with SMTP id f5mr2330065yhd.66.1408663922368; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.161.214 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140820165236.31862.86067.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20140820165236.31862.86067.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:32:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CAC9dYpwvif1Grj61tTMcCqDPnMyc+F_E8yMgL_E4GM5xJGtJpg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gabor Bajko <gaborbajko@gmail.com>
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c3d980b3761105012c20c2"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/paws/3KE0VPR1xT7JqDlzppu201xoUlg
Cc: "paws@ietf.org" <paws@ietf.org>, paws-chairs@tools.ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-paws-protocol@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [paws] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-paws-protocol-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: paws@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Protocol to Access White Space database \(PAWS\)" <paws.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/paws/>
List-Post: <mailto:paws@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 23:32:05 -0000

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:

> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-paws-protocol-14: Discuss
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCUSS:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm glad this work is being done in the IETF, thanks for all your
> effort.
>
> A couple of my points below have overlaps with some of Stephen's points.
>
> = Shepherd write-up =
> "Yes, there were 2 IPR disclosures filed that reference this document.
> They were discussed in the WG, and nobody came forward to say that they'd
> like to change anything in the document because of the disclosures."
>
> But there are 3 IPR disclosures in the tracker, not 2. Were all three
> discussed in the WG?
>
> This  3rd IPR disclosure seems to have surfaced 2 months after the
shepherd write-up, that is why it is not mentioned in the write-up.
I think the best we can do now is to consult the WG about this disclosure
in parallel with the iesg evaluations.
Gabor