Re: draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo WGLC and IPR check

[Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>]

Greg,

Sorry if the phrasing was confusing. 

We are looking for any undisclosed ipr. 

Jeff

On Apr 10, 2023, at 9:05 PM, Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]> wrote:



Hi Jeff,

I got confused by the "any additional IPR applicable to this document" in the announcement. AFAIK, there is no IPR disclosure for the https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cw-bfd-unaffiliated-echo/" rel="nofollow">draft-cw-bfd-unaffiliated-echo, nor for the https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo/" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo. Have I missed something?

Regards,

Greg

On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 8:27 AM Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]> wrote:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo" rel="noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo

Working Group,

The Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo has completed.  My judgment is that it has weak, but positive support to proceed to publication.  This isn't atypical of BFD work at this point in the BFD Working Group's life. 

The next steps for the document:

1. Please continue to iterate through the issues raised during last call.  I will be summarizing them in the original WGLC thread.  I suspect we can reach conclusion for them shortly.

2. Each of the authors needs to make an attestation as to whether they're aware of any additional IPR applicable to this document.  The rest of the Working Group, as per BCP 78/79[1] should also disclose of any applicable IPR if they're aware of it.

One thing that makes this document particularly interesting is that this work is covered partially under work done in BBF in TR-146.  This will be noted in the shepherd writeup.


-- Jeff

[1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8179.html#section-5.1" rel="noreferrer nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8179.html#section-5.1