Russ, This isn’t normal practice, but based on your comment, the IPR declaration has been reissued explicitly for the WG draft.
Cheers, Andy On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Stewart Bryant <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Russ > > Thank you for the review. > > I would like to respond to one point: > > > Notes: >> >> I see that draft-cheng-pwe3-mpls-tp-dual-homing-protection the >> earlier >> Internet-Draft file name for this document. An IPR declaration was >> issued against that earlier name. The shepherd write-up indicates >> that >> "The WG were not concerned about the IPR disclosure." However, it is >> unclear to me whether we should ask for the IPR declaration to be >> issued >> against the current Internet-Draft file name. >> >> > The authors all responded including of course the author from the company > that > filed the IPR. All indicated that no additional IPR was known about. > > The IPR disclosure shows up in datatracker. > > We do not normally chase companies to update their IPR disclosures, as > documents progress, and indeed if we chase them to do this update we need > to chase them shortly for a further one as the draft becomes an RFC. > > Since you pointed it out we have asked the author to ask his patent dept > to do the update, but I hope that this does not become an IETF policy > making it even harder to pass the IPR checks that we put in place in RTG. > > Thanks > > Stewart > > >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
