On 25/04/2013 00:09, Randy Bush wrote:
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?
While it's not the IETF business to validate IPRs, let me stress one
line from the IPR page
Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory License to All Implementers with
Possible Royalty/Fee.
Regards, Benoit
otherwise, we potentially will waste a lot of time over this ipr claim.
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
