IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [regext] draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay unreasonably stuck on IPR?

"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com> Wed, 09 November 2016 13:20 UTC

Return-Path: <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
X-Original-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: regext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1141C12964C; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 05:20:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.398
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 o_phlOdbHu1E; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 05:20:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail2.verisign.com (mail2.verisign.com [72.13.63.31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A78012945B; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 05:20:43 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,614,1473120000"; d="scan'208";a="436204"
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23: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
X-IPAS-Result: A2G9AQBxISNY//SZrQpdHAEBBAEBCgEBFwEBBAEBCgEBgwQBAQEBAXd/B402lwqUVoIIKYV7AoJeFAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAoEHgjMaAQk5PAEBAQEBASMCPiwBAQEBAzoNMgwEAgEIDQQEAQELFAkHMhQJCAIECgQFCIhis1KDT4d1AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFwWGP4RZhEqDL4IvAQSaKgYBhjeaMIYShySEBx6GYnKGLIEMAQEB
Received: from brn1wnexcas01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (brn1wnexcas01 [10.173.152.205]) by brn1lxmailout01.verisign.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id uA9DKf30011858 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 08:20:41 -0500
Received: from BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) by brn1wnexcas01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 08:20:38 -0500
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
To: Antoin Verschuren <antoin@antoin.nl>
Thread-Topic: [regext] draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay unreasonably stuck on IPR?
Thread-Index: AQHSOc8SmZYmvKlkXUuB5QASPzBGjKDPep2ggAE+xwD//9WSMIAAZRQA//+wCEA=
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 13:20:37 +0000
Message-ID: <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F4A4BCDEA@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
References: <20161108144742.GH2473@Hanna.local> <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F4A4BC33E@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <20161109093524.GC89276@Vurt.local> <831693C2CDA2E849A7D7A712B24E257F4A4BCC19@BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <1F58DB7B-C721-4642-9012-3F243227499A@antoin.nl>
In-Reply-To: <1F58DB7B-C721-4642-9012-3F243227499A@antoin.nl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.173.152.4]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/3J6sGSOS-y4hEZoimIKq2zrMrAQ>
Cc: Job Snijders <job@instituut.net>, "draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay.all@ietf.org>, "Livesay, Paul" <plivesay@verisign.com>, "regext@ietf.org" <regext@ietf.org>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [regext] draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay unreasonably stuck on IPR?
X-BeenThere: regext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/regext/>
List-Post: <mailto:regext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext>, <mailto:regext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 13:20:45 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Antoin Verschuren [mailto:antoin@antoin.nl]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 8:05 AM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: Job Snijders; Stephen Farrell; draft-ietf-eppext-
> keyrelay.all@ietf.org; Livesay, Paul; regext@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [regext] draft-ietf-eppext-keyrelay unreasonably stuck on
> IPR?
> 
> Op 9 nov. 2016, om 13:19 heeft Hollenbeck, Scott
> <shollenbeck@verisign.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > This never happened. Point 2:
> >
> > "I think you need to be clear about which of these cases is actually
> being supported and about the overall sequence of events needed. (If
> you tell me that you really want to do whatever is in draft-koch, then
> that's fine but then this draft is probably premature and draft-koch
> would need to be a normative ref.)"
> >
> > This never happened, either. Failure to address these two points is
> what held up the document, not the disclosure that I as an IETF
> participant was required to make.
> 
> I need to correct you on this one Scott.
> Issue 2 was resolved in the latest version of the draft (12), as
> communicated by Rik:
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/Y_6WuONMXiQolqfguUcfdgA6uD
> s
> 
> The authors chose to adjust text in stead of reviving draft-koch and
> make it a normative reference, even though the authors of draft-koch
> are happy to revive the draft and ask for adoption by the DNSOPS WG.
> 
> The reason for this is that draft-koch is harassed by the same IPR, and
> the cause why adoption by the DNSOPS WG never happened.
> It's been in that state for so long now, that copies of the secure
> transfer concept start to appear in new drafts targeted for DNSOPS like
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pounsett-transferring-automated-
> dnssec-zones/ which are then also targeted by the IPR because
> participants don't remember anymore.

OK, thanks, good to know. The discuss should have been updated to note that change.

Scott

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email