Re: [tcpm] Last Call: draft-ietf-tcpm-tcpsecure (Improving TCP's Robustness to Blind In-Window Attacks) to Proposed Standard

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

Anantha Ramaiah (ananth) wrote:

>    There were some comments by Sandra Murphy which we have had
> discussion. I had already responded to Fernando's comments and the
> agreed upon comments are being incorporated. 

IIRC, there had been comments from Brian Carpenter about specific
requirements for text in RFC 3979. Here's a quote from Brian's post:


> Personal belief doesn't come into it. It's strictly defined in a BCP.
> RFC3979 tells us the rules about this. Basically, the RFC Editor will
> do what is required:
>
> "4.  Actions for Documents for which IPR Disclosure(s) Have Been
>      Received
>
>    (A) When any Intellectual Property Right is disclosed before
>        publication as an  RFC, with respect to any technology or
>        specification, described in a Contribution in the manner set
>        forth in Section 6 of this document, the RFC Editor shall
>        ensure
>        that the document include a note indicating the existence of
>        such
>        claimed Intellectual Property Rights in any RFC published from
>        the Contribution.  (See Section 5 below.)"
>
> [Section 5 defines the exact text to be included in such RFCs.
> I believe you can use <?rfc iprnotified="yes"?> in xml2rfc.]


I'm not sure what's the chairs' and ADs' take on this issue.

Thanks!

Kind regards,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: [e-mail] || [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1