> I came to the attention of the Chairs and the ADs during the call for
> adoption that an IPR disclosure was likely pending on this draft. It
> has since transpired.
>
> The disclosure can be reviewed here.
>
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=document_search&id_document_tag=draft-krishnan-opsawg-large-flow-load-balancing.
>
> In my opinion this is bit late frankly but short of 6701 remedy
> territory. I have asked the chairs to extend the current call for
> additional time (which they should chime in on), and I would ask that
> if the disclosure alters you opinion of the document that you please
> make your concerns known.
>
> I'd like to thank the authors for their candor, and the chairs for
> bringing this to our attention.
i sent a concerned private email to some folk. one replied
The authors have indicated that the stuff on which they've filed the
patent application is not the only mechanism that can be used for
large flow detection - i.e. this can be implemented without using
their to-be-encumbered technology.
if this is the case, why not simply remove the to-be-encumbered
technology from the document?
otherwise, we potentially will waste a lot of time over this ipr claim.
randy
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
