[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Last Call: <draft-polk-ipr-disclosure-03.txt> (Promoting Compliance with Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Disclosure Rules) to Informational RFC

>>>>> "Russ" == Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

    Russ> Sam: I'm seeking clarity.  Are you suggesting that the pre-WG
    Russ> mail list ask this question while drafting the charter, or are
    Russ> you suggesting that the IESG include this question in the call
    Russ> for external review of the charter, or both?

I don't know; I haven't thought in that much detail.  I'm stating as
fact that there are cases where we adopt documents as part of chartering
work; I've been involved in that as a BOF proponent and as an AD.

I believe that it's important to consider the IPR implications then as
with any other adoption.  In the cases I've been aware of there has been
no IPR.  I suspect that if there were IPR that a WG would be much more
likely to consider something as a potential starting point ((not adopted
in the charter process) than as a basis (adopted in the charter

My personal opinion is that if we're diligent about making sure
disclosures are filed prior to the review of the charter, the rest will
take care of itself.  I don't mind if people want more process than
that, but I don't have strong opinions on what it should be.  I agree
with you that asking on the bof list or asking in external review would
be reasonable ways to approach that.

[IETF Annoucements]     [IETF Obscurity Interest]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux]     [Pilates]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]

Add to Google