Subject: should we meet in Minneapolis?

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2005 10:35:58 -0500

Of late, there has been a lot of discussion on two major issues: the 
copyright policy and the desire for an open source-friendly defensive 
patent license?  SHould we request a meeting in Minneapolis to discuss 
these issues?  Are there other items that would merit a face-to-face 
discussion?  (Note: I do not think that there is any point to reopening 
the question of the IETF's fundamental patent policy, i.e., that we do 
permit patented technology but that the WG must be aware of the issues. 
I do not perceive that there has been enough change in the world or in 
the IETF to warrant discussing it anew -- the consensus last time was 
quite strong.)

		--Prof. Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

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

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 17:36:39 +0200 (EET)

On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
> discussion?

I think it is very important to try to work on an open source-friendly 
defensive patent license.  That would help with a LOT of working 
groups with their participants' IPR concerns.

Unfortunately, I fear that there must be some progress and/or more 
concrete proposals to achieve a civil discussion.  So, something 
definitely needs to happen before we meet, but tentative meeting 
planning might not be a bad idea.

> the IETF to warrant discussing it anew

Agreed.

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

---

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:45:04 -0500

> planning might not be a bad idea.

Sounds good.  Let's schedule a slot. 

swb

---

From: Paul Hoffman / VPNC <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 15:05:49 -0800

At 5:36 PM +0200 1/7/05, Pekka Savola wrote:
>concrete proposals to achieve a civil discussion.

Unfortunately, I fully agree.

>   So, something definitely needs to happen before we meet, but 
>tentative meeting planning might not be a bad idea.

We can cancel the slot if there are no Internet Drafts on the subject 
to discuss maybe three weeks before the meeting.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium