Re: Next steps when IPR has been disclosed for a specification
Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> Tue, 14 January 2025 19:45 UTC
Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EABECC20C8FD for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 11:45:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=episteme.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qt1VmruvCpaN for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 11:45:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 510EAC21657A for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 11:45:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.1.31] (unknown [172.16.1.31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YXfjs0lFlzfnvs; Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:45:21 -0600 (CST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=episteme.net; s=mail; t=1736883921; bh=sGtRUWRyvn9HqnLyqLPjUOwT2ufuRPdPfKR8+amIjHk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=M7PJ4Z/lwgrvt76Oejv5IdFrqYWgT1JpA3yTHBOqDVpAitzB0NloHM91qW25TICC2 kwc1StoaIpX2uSXqAbNSWE4vc0o6YbPOdFfCitFOtPbcN60bnb7fNFSosQto3rYoiY 8Ky2eeae0e7DbeSiEEodw42nLNplTEF4LC8Q0u9g=
From: Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>
To: Michael Jones <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Next steps when IPR has been disclosed for a specification
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:45:20 -0600
Message-ID: <51DE4979-B43C-4437-B276-45EB56AA1B0C@episteme.net>
In-Reply-To: <PH7PR02MB9292953172A5CE2EEACD9E26B7112@PH7PR02MB9292.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAE+mDdxLZ0P7GhkCB0ydFiWOb43EjX=Jp35Xryko3KT8UC7JNw@mail.gmail.com> <2ba3cab7-0195-4362-38fe-a47e2824ffa4@ietf.contact> <PH7PR02MB929269EFF0CF5E5E9801E5B2B7062@PH7PR02MB9292.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <VI0PR83MB07623B6AB379C454BCB47AC7B2102@VI0PR83MB0762.EURPRD83.prod.outlook.com> <PH7PR02MB9292953172A5CE2EEACD9E26B7112@PH7PR02MB9292.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_19A7251D-2692-4538-9FA6-6C61092E3B6D_="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Embedded-HTML: [{"plain":[1053,2517],"uuid":"9DE8A29F-33BF-48B4-8156-9A774DB4AA9F"}]
X-Synology-Spam-Status: score=-0.1, required 6, FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT 0, FROM_HAS_DN 0, FROM_EQ_ENVFROM 0, HTML_MISSING_CTYPE 0, TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL 0, __HDRS_LCASE_KNOWN 0, MIME_GOOD -0.1, RCPT_COUNT_TWO 0, MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM 0, NO_RECEIVED -0.001, FREEMAIL_TO 0, RCVD_COUNT_ZERO 0, HTML_MESSAGE 0.001, __freemail_safe 0, ARC_NA 0, MISSING_XM_UA 0, TO_DN_SOME 0, MIME_TRACE 0, __THREADED 0, __NOT_SPOOFED 0
X-Synology-Spam-Flag: no
Message-ID-Hash: ZK7EQDEUG4TOBIMU3AFWG35GWJ4WL74F
X-Message-ID-Hash: ZK7EQDEUG4TOBIMU3AFWG35GWJ4WL74F
X-MailFrom: resnick@episteme.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-wgchairs.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/GlwPylkPBsHgffuJXEr-_ZhlxFg>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:wgchairs-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:wgchairs-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:wgchairs-leave@ietf.org>
Just spotted this thread. Sorry for the late reply. What others have said is exactly right. However, there's a side issue to consider: The document first appeared as an individual draft in March 2023. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs/ The patent application was originally filed in January 2022 and published in February 2024 https://patents.google.com/patent/US20240064033A1/en The author in question is both a named author of the document and a named inventor on the patent application. If this disclosure is truly the first one done about this document, that seems a little beyond "promptly" disclosing as per RFC 8179 section 3.3. Avoiding these kinds of disclosures late in the process (like post WGLC) is exactly what 8179 is trying to stop. You may want to consult RFC 6701 about how to deal with this late disclosure. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6701/ pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best On 7 Jan 2025, at 10:41, Michael Jones wrote: > Dear WG chairs, > > What are the next steps when IPR has been disclosed about a draft in > response to the shepherd's IPR inquiry? I've never been down that > branch of the process before. > > Thanks, > -- > Mike > > From: Antoine Delignat-Lavaud <antdl@microsoft.com> > Sent: Monday, January 6, 2025 3:25 AM > To: Michael Jones <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com>; Cedric Fournet > <fournet@microsoft.com> > Cc: cose@ietf.org > Subject: Re: IPR for draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs > > Hi Mike, > > Apologies for the delayed response. I have submitted an IPR disclosure > related to US18/260763 which should appear on the IETF data tracker > website shortly. I don't believe we have any further disclosures to > file according to RFC8179 rules. > > Best, > Antoine > > > ________________________________ > From: Michael Jones > <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com<mailto:michael_b_jones@hotmail.com>> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2024 20:29 > To: Antoine Delignat-Lavaud > <antdl@microsoft.com<mailto:antdl@microsoft.com>> ; Cedric Fournet > <fournet@microsoft.com<mailto:fournet@microsoft.com>> > Cc: cose@ietf.org<mailto:cose@ietf.org> > <cose@ietf.org<mailto:cose@ietf.org>> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: IPR for draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs > > Antoine and Cedric, > > The chairs need your IPR statements in order to progress the document. > Please reply-all to this note. > > Thank you, > -- Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: Henk Birkholz > <henk.birkholz@ietf.contact<mailto:henk.birkholz@ietf.contact>> > Sent: Sunday, December 8, 2024 12:09 PM > To: Ivaylo Petrov > <ivaylopetrov@google.com<mailto:ivaylopetrov@google.com>> ; Antoine > Delignat-Lavaud <antdl@microsoft.com<mailto:antdl@microsoft.com>> ; > Orie Steele > <orie@transmute.industries<mailto:orie@transmute.industries>> ; Cedric > Fournet <fournet@microsoft.com<mailto:fournet@microsoft.com>> ; > Michael Jones > <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com<mailto:michael_b_jones@hotmail.com>> > Subject: Re: IPR for draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs > > Dear chairs, > > I am not aware of any patent claims that would read on this > specification. > > > Viele Grüße, > > Henk > > On 08.12.24 15:08, Ivaylo Petrov wrote: >> Dear authors, >> >> Are you aware of any IPR that pertains to >> draft-ietf-cose-merkle-tree-proofs draft? I will include this in the >> shepherd write up. >> >> Thanks, >> Ivo
- Next steps when IPR has been disclosed for a spec… Michael Jones
- Re: Next steps when IPR has been disclosed for a … Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [irsg] Next steps when IPR has been disclosed… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [irsg] Next steps when IPR has been disclosed… David Schinazi
- Re: [irsg] Next steps when IPR has been disclosed… John Mattsson
- Re: Next steps when IPR has been disclosed for a … Pete Resnick