Re: [Teas] Regarding IPR on draft-ietf-teas-yang-path-computation-21

["Dieter Beller (Nokia)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Pavan, all,

No, I'm not aware of any IPR that applies to this draft

Thanks,
Dieter (as a contributor)

On 17-Oct-23 06:39, Vishnu Pavan Beeram wrote:
> 	
> CAUTION:This is an external email. Please be very careful when 
> clicking links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for 
> additional information.
>
> Authors, Contributors, WG,
>
> As part of the preparation for polling for (second) WG last call:
>
> 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 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 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 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 and listed
> contributor. NOTE: THIS APPLIES TO ALL OF YOU LISTED IN THIS
> MESSAGE'S TO LINES.
>
> 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 see the RFCs listed above
> and
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/IntellectualProperty.
>
> Thank you,
> TEAS WG Chairs
> ps: Please note that an IPR poll was conducted before the first WG LC.
> The poll is being conducted again because (1) there have been a 
> significant
> number of changes made to the document since the last poll and (2) there
> has been a change made to the list of authors.