Re: [Raw] [Detnet] Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-raw-architecture-11

[Eve Schooler <[e-mail]>]

Rex, Thanks for confirming that there are no IPR issues regarding the draft.
--Eve

On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 4:13 PM Rex Buddenberg <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> I know of no IPR regarding RAW issues; particularly on my contributions --
> they are all open sourced.
>
> b
>
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 3:25 PM Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Rex:
>>
>> You are listed as a contributor to the RAW architecture. The IETF
>> procedure requires that you indicate whether you have IPR on the text
>> therein; I really expect not but then we need your confirmation. Can you
>> please see with Eve?
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Pascal
>> ------------------------------
>> *De :* detnet <[e-mail]> de la part de Eve Schooler <
>> [e-mail]>
>> *Envoyé :* jeudi 27 juillet 2023 12:50
>> *À :* Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <[e-mail]>; Lou Berger <
>> [e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
>> [e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
>> [e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>;
>> [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
>> [e-mail]>
>> *Cc :* [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <
>> [e-mail]>; [e-mail] <[e-mail]>;
>> [e-mail] <[e-mail]>; John Scudder <[e-mail]>
>> *Objet :* Re: [Detnet] Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-raw-architecture-11
>>
>> Hi Contributors,
>> Thus far, we have had confirmation from Greg, Xavi, Pascal, and Georgios.
>> The WG still needs to hear from Lou, Remous-Aris and Rex.
>> Please see the explicit instructions below (to reply to all those in the
>> To and CC lists, and use the language requested below).
>> Many thanks,
>> Eve
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 10:43 AM Eve Schooler <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Authors, Contributors, WGs,
>>
>> In tandem with WG Last Call, and in preparation for re-issuing the draft (as it is expired at present) and the transition to roll the RAW WG back into DetNet,
>>
>> Are you aware of any IPR that applies to the draft identified above?
>>
>> Please state either:
>>
>> "No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft"
>> or
>> "Yes, I'm aware of IPR that applies to this draft"
>>
>> If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules
>> (see RFCs 3669, 5378 and 8179 for more details)?
>>
>> If yes to the above, please state either:
>>
>> "Yes, the IPR has been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules"
>> or
>> "No, the IPR has not been disclosed"
>>
>> If you answer no, please provide any additional details you think
>> appropriate. If you are listed as a document author, co-author, or contributor
>> please answer the
>> above by responding to this email regardless of whether or not you are
>> aware of any relevant IPR. This document will not advance to the next
>> stage until a response has been received from each author.
>>
>> NOTE: THIS APPLIES TO ALL OF YOU LISTED IN THIS MESSAGE'S TO LINE.
>>
>> If you are on the WG email list or attend WG meetings but are not listed
>> as an author or contributor, we remind you of your obligations under
>> the IETF IPR rules which encourages you to notify the IETF if you are
>> aware of IPR of others on an IETF contribution, or to refrain from
>> participating in any contribution or discussion related to your
>> undisclosed IPR. For more information, please seehttps://www.ietf.org/standards/ipr/
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Eve (as Shepherd)
>>
>> PS Please include all listed in the headers of this message in your
>> response.
>>
>>