On Jan 31, 2013, at 6:58 PM, Fernando Gont <[email protected]> wrote:
> Folks, > > As noted below, I'm not aware of any relevant IPR. > > That said, is it possible/desirable for these questions to be > asked/answered off-list? (and then the results posted on list) I think that for maximum transparency these are supposed to be / should be done onlist. As well as getting each author / contributor to explicitly state that they have no IRP, it also reminds others to speak up if they know of any… > > -- I must admit that the subject kind of scared me into "who the h* > filed an IPR on this document?" :-) Fair enough -- the ams thing has happened to me a few times… I'll try to remember to reword the subject line in the future to avoid the startle factor.. > > > On 01/31/2013 04:39 PM, Warren Kumari wrote: >>> Are you personally aware of any IPR that applies to >>> draft-ietf-opsec-ipv6-implications-on-ipv4-nets? > > No. And I'd be surprised if there was (is that even possible)? In the crazy world of IPR it seems that almost anything is possible…. W > > Thanks! > > Best regards, > -- > Fernando Gont > SI6 Networks > e-mail: [email protected] > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OPSEC mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec > -- "Let's just say that if complete and utter chaos was lightning, he'd be the sort to stand on a hilltop in a thunderstorm wearing wet copper armour and shouting 'All gods are bastards'." -- Rincewind discussing Twoflower (Terry Pratchett, The Colour of Magic) _______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
