At 2:44 PM -0500 2/18/09, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >Rather than a standing board (which was what I thought you had >intended), you're suggesting (translated IETF terms) that when a WG >encounters a patent thought to be related, a group will be formed >consisting of the AD, the WG chair(s) ex officio, representatives of >the WG (presumably designated by the chair(s)), perhaps an IAB liason >-- and the IETF patent counsel.
I think you are putting words in Larry's mouth. In has past few messages, he has indeed talked about what sounded like a standing board, one that sounded like it would deal with issues from all WGs. Larry, since you refuse to write a draft (and like to insult people who say that one is needed), can you at least say whether Steve or I are closer to your proposal? --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
