On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:53:11AM -0400, Brian Haberman wrote: > On 10/14/15 10:45 AM, Jeffrey Haas wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 07:38:27AM -0700, Brian Haberman wrote: > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> COMMENT: > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Just a question on this draft... Given its status as clarifying (and > >> updating) RFC 5884, does it also inherit any of the IPR claims levied > >> against RFC 5884? > >> > > > > All existing IPR stands. No new IPR is introduced. > > Maybe my parser is broken, but does this mean: > > 1. None of the IPR disclosures filed against 5884 apply to this draft > > 2. All/some of the IPR disclosures filed against 5884 apply, but > disclosures have not (will not?) be filed against this draft?
Since this document only clarifies 5884, the IPR against 5884 is still applicable. The clarifications do not introduce any new IPR against the material covered in 5884. A bit more flippantly, just because we publish a clarification document with no additional IPR doesn't mean we think we're getting rid of the existing IPR considerations. :-) -- Jeff
