Dear Jim, WG, On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 02:04:12AM +0000, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote: > Here are my raw notes:
Thanks for the notes Alexander! > Keyrelay > --------- > > IPR - active patent application by Verisign. Understanding is that WG > doesn't want to progress without words on licensing terms regarding > the IPR Understands from mailing list that interesting in moving > forward without licensing terms is low - authors ovbiously want to > move forward. > > Alissa: Have only seen support for moving forward on the list > Jim: Support was just from authors > Ulrich: Want to move forward > Olafur: Can we get a sense of the room? > > Hum: Room wants to move forward, 1-2 people hum against, will ask on > mailing list too, and then take appropriate steps For the record: I do not understand why Jim asserted that "support was just from authors". In addition to the authors, the following non-author people support moving forward and two of them provided argumentation: Myself - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/9zGh5u-DZeyfqhG9-cP3aceT3xk Bert Hubert - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/xb7fEsuiaR0n1kSAkWnzLaAkgIU Marco Davids - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/regext/DLYj5rsetAAcTUw03um2p2UZJLM Given the room's hum to move forward the above information is somewhat moot, but Jim did ask to be challenged according to the meeting video. :-) Kind regards, Job _______________________________________________ regext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
