Subject: [dhcwg] IPR Issue with draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-02

From: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:39:46 +0000

Hi:

We recently concluded a WGLC on the draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-02 where Bernie Volz had written in the WGLC initiation (on Oct 12): "There are no IPR claims reported at this time." This was based on what was in the datatracker at that time.

We're not exactly sure of the changes made, but prior to the "IPR Disclosure: Orange's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation-02" email from the IEFT Secretariat on Dec 15th, the datatracker was showing two IPR claims - now it is up to 3 with this latest notification.

I believe that what happened here was because of the various changes to the document's name as it worked its way through the IETF, the original IPR claims were lost and only recently re-associated with the later documents. And, that recent queries to the authors regarding IPR for the WGLC triggered the latest IPR filing.

Two of the IPR notifications were filed many years ago against an earlier draft, http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bajko-pripaddrassign/. The document chain now is:

--> draft-bajko-pripaddrassign

--> Replaced by: draft-sun-dhc-port-set-option

--> Replaced by: draft-csf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation

--> Replaced by: draft-ietf-dhc-dynamic-shared-v4allocation

And, from my understanding, the latest IPR notification updates the earlier http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1119/ with US and Japan patent numbers (I am not saying that is the only change; please view all the declarations for yourself)!!

Thus, the question to the WG is whether or not your position on this work would have been different had you been aware of the IPR claims. If it would have affected your position negatively (i.e., you would not have indicated that the work should advance), please let the WG know that so we can re-evaluate.

Everyone is reminded that IETF intellectual property rights rules are defined in RFC 3979, "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology." See http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/.

Also, please be sure that as a document changes its name during its journey through the IETF, that the IPR notifications keep up with the document (if you need assistance here, please let us know).

Sincerely,

- Tomek & Bernie