Hi Jeff, I got confused by the "any additional IPR applicable to this document" in the announcement. AFAIK, there is no IPR disclosure for the draft-cw-bfd-unaffiliated-echo <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cw-bfd-unaffiliated-echo/>, nor for the draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo/>. Have I missed something?
Regards, Greg On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 8:27 AM Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo > > Working Group, > > The Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo has > completed. My judgment is that it has weak, but positive support to > proceed to publication. This isn't atypical of BFD work at this point in > the BFD Working Group's life. > > The next steps for the document: > > 1. Please continue to iterate through the issues raised during last call. > I will be summarizing them in the original WGLC thread. I suspect we can > reach conclusion for them shortly. > > 2. Each of the authors needs to make an attestation as to whether they're > aware of any additional IPR applicable to this document. The rest of the > Working Group, as per BCP 78/79[1] should also disclose of any applicable > IPR if they're aware of it. > > One thing that makes this document particularly interesting is that this > work is covered partially under work done in BBF in TR-146. This will be > noted in the shepherd writeup. > > > -- Jeff > > [1] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8179.html#section-5.1 > > >
