IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rats] IPR statements about draft-ietf-rats-architecture

Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu> Wed, 08 December 2021 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <hardjono@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A5183A044A for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 13:46:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
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 U58WqgbhZ1mF for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 13:46:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu [18.9.28.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDB3E3A0442 for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 13:46:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oc11exedge2.exchange.mit.edu (OC11EXEDGE2.EXCHANGE.MIT.EDU [18.9.3.18]) by outgoing-exchange-7.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 1B8Lkddt016948; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 16:46:40 -0500
Received: from w92expo23.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.77) by oc11exedge2.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.3.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.26; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 16:46:26 -0500
Received: from oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu (18.9.4.88) by w92expo23.exchange.mit.edu (18.7.74.77) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.23; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 16:46:38 -0500
Received: from oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu ([18.9.4.88]) by oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu ([18.9.4.88]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.023; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 16:46:38 -0500
From: Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@mit.edu>
To: Dave Thaler <dthaler=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>, "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Rats] IPR statements about draft-ietf-rats-architecture
Thread-Index: AQHX0rn6NLOrBG5EyEGmau+ec3S+TKv4K/CAgADtI4CABMoRgIACgYAAgAsk1ACAAB5BgIAAcXUAgADgvoCAHH/CgP//2obu
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 21:46:38 +0000
Message-ID: <b5fe008548334aabbc4b7dc310439524@oc11expo23.exchange.mit.edu>
References: <BL0PR11MB3122C34EDBAA30E9B47D6116A19C9@BL0PR11MB3122.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <5D70BD38-F6C4-404F-B0F9-3B4E0ACABE89@gmail.com> <16775.1637423187@localhost>, <CH2PR21MB14642EC6C961609BC115F43EA36F9@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR21MB14642EC6C961609BC115F43EA36F9@CH2PR21MB1464.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [73.100.88.16]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/37EFdkip0px3tG5OasYRpQvZaUU>
Subject: Re: [Rats] IPR statements about draft-ietf-rats-architecture
X-BeenThere: rats@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Remote ATtestation procedureS <rats.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rats/>
List-Post: <mailto:rats@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 21:46:56 -0000

+1  Agree with Dave.  

Its about time we have a stable set of terminologies & concepts contained in an RFC that we can point to.



--thomas



________________________________________
From: RATS [rats-bounces@ietf.org] on behalf of Dave Thaler [dthaler=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org]
Sent: Wednesday, December 8, 2021 1:58 PM
To: Michael Richardson; Kathleen Moriarty; Eric Voit (evoit); Hannes Tschofenig; rats@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Rats] IPR statements about draft-ietf-rats-architecture

My personal opinion is that publication should proceed, especially
since the architecture document is just Informational.

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: RATS <rats-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2021 7:46 AM
To: Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com>; Eric Voit (evoit) <evoit@cisco.com>; Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@arm.com>; rats@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Rats] IPR statements about draft-ietf-rats-architecture


Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
    > I wouldn’t go by that date as I did a call for IPR and then had to
    > wait. That might have been the trigger, not sure.

    > Hannes, can your lawyers look at what’s been provided so far?

The IPR disclosures on the IETF web site are almost always completely useless.  This one included in my opinion.

Worse, a typo in the markup of the previous version means that the 3.1 heading actually didn't render.  So it's not clear what the IPR claim refers to.

At best the IPR declaration tells us what patent application to look at, and we don't even know if the PTO will even accept all the claims.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide




_______________________________________________
RATS mailing list
RATS@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email