Subject: IPR disclosures: stds track vs all IETF documents?

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 16:48:26 +0300 (EEST)

Hi,

Triggered by a private comment, I'm not really sure whether IPR 
disclosures should be filed by all IETF documents or just standards track 
documents; the former include also:

 - Informational / Experimental WG submissions
 - Informational individual submissions that go directly to the IESG
 - Informational individual submissions that go via RFC editor
   * proprietary protocols
   * republishings of other SDOs' documents
   * other documents

It seems to me that RFC2026 10.4 would require IPR disclosures only for 
standards track documents (but I could have missed something), while in 
submission rights -05:

3. IETF Actions

   (A)  When any intellectual property is disclosed, with respect to any
      technology, specification, or standard described in an IETF
      document in the manner set forth in sec 6 of this document, the
      IESG shall require that the document has a note indicating the
      existence of such claimed intellectual property rights.
[...]

Which is it?

(IMO, having to disclosure also non-stds track documents seems very
sensible -- with a possible exception to the documents to which the IETF
does not have the change control.)

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

---

From: Scott Bradner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 13:22:05 -0400 (EDT)

see the Note Well note (http://www.ietf.org/maillist.html)
this was clarified a few years back with the publication of the
Note Well note

Scott