headers
Ralph Droms | 1 Jun 2004 22:02
Picon
Favicon

IPR disclosure and <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt>


The dhc WG has "Subscriber-ID Suboption for the DHCP Relay Agent
Option", <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt>", as a work item.  This
Internet Draft has passed WG last call and IETF last call.  There is
an IPR disclosure associated with this Internet Draft,
http://ietf.org/ietf/IPR/PacketFront-IPR.txt.  The WG needs to decide
if it is willing to accept the specification in the Internet Draft
with the associated IPR disclosure.

draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt passed WG last call on 2003-09-12
and passed IETF last call on 2004-02-03.  During the IETF last call,
the IESG received a notification of an IPR disclosure related to the
Internet Draft.  Although the IPR disclosure had been published
2003-04-17, there was no general notification of that publication and,
apparently, no one in the dhc WG or the IESG was aware of the IPR
disclosure.

The dhc WG discussed the publication of the Internet Draft on the
dhcwg mailing list and there was support on both sides of the issue.
Because RFC 3667 and RFC 3668 were both ready for publication,
discussion was suspended pending publication of those new documents
related to IPR in the IETF.

The original IPR disclosure applied to two Internet Drafts,
<draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-00.txt> and <draft-ietf-dhc-
server-override-00.txt>.  The original disclosure made no mention of
any use licensing agreements for the IPR.  Concurrently with the WG
discussion on the IPR disclosure, a new IPR disclosure was published
on 2004-02-02, which refers only to
<draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-00.txt> and which includes RAND
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ted Lemon | 2 Jun 2004 06:08
Gravatar

Re: IPR disclosure and <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt>

"Reasonable and Non-discriminatory" sounds really nice and comforting, 
but what does it actually mean?   "Reasonable" has no explicit, 
enforceable meaning whatsoever.   It implies that the fee charged for 
use of the technology will be affordable, but by whom?   And why imply 
it - why not just say it?   Sure, in a court of law, "reasonable" is 
better protection than nothing, but it's not much better.   
"Non-discriminatory" implies that all implementors will be subject to 
the same fee structure, which may be unaffordable to some without going 
against the meaning of the phrase.

Generally speaking, what geeks like us mean when they say "reasonable 
and non-discriminatory" is "there won't be a fee or any patent 
enforcement unless you take patent enforcement action against us 
first."   I think this is even what the legal folks writing these IPR 
notices intend when they write them.   The problem is that the language 
they are using actually means something else, and provides no 
protection at all to implementors of RFCs where such implementations 
would infringe.   Like using sprintf when you should have used 
snprintf, this does us no harm in the usual case, but could do us great 
harm if something goes wrong.   This is not an idle worry - we have all 
seen, on many occasions, IPR holding companies do their worst with IP 
rights that were originally acquired as protection, not as a revenue 
source, after a failed dot-com's assets were purchased by someone else.

For my own part, I am against putting the working group's stamp of 
approval on technology that is encumbered under the "reasonable and 
non-discriminatory" label, not because I do not trust the intentions of 
those who wrote the IPR statements, nor because I don't trust the 
intentions of those whose names are on the patents, but simply because 
those people may not be the people who wind up enforcing the IPR
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Ralph Droms | 2 Jun 2004 15:57
Picon
Favicon

Agenda for dhc WG meeting at IETF 60

It's time to start thinking about our agenda for the WG meeting in San
Diego.  Please let me know if you have an item you would like to see on the
agenda.

I've asked to avoid meeting at the same time as the following WGs:

dna, dnsext, dnsop, geopriv, ipcdn, ipv6, manet, nemo, netconf,
v6ops, zeroconf, zerouter

Are there any others I should ask to avoid?

- Ralph
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
The IESG | 2 Jun 2004 16:59
Picon
Favicon

Protocol Action: 'NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6' to Proposed Standard

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6 '
   <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-05.txt> as a Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Dynamic Host Configuration Working 
Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Margaret Wasserman and Thomas Narten.

Technical Summary

   This document describes four options for NIS-related configuration
   information in DHCPv6: NIS Servers [3], NIS+ Servers [3], NIS Client 
   Domain Name [3], NIS+ Client Domain name [3].

Working Group Summary

   This document was produced by the DHC WG and has been through
   WG last call and IETF last call.  In the last call process, it was
   verified that an IPv6 implementation of NIS is available.

Protocol Quality

   This document has been reviewed for the IESG by Margaret Wasserman.

RFC Editor Note:

RFC Editor, please change section 1. of the document as follows:
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Steve Gonczi | 2 Jun 2004 19:46

RE: IPR disclosure and <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt>

I agree with Ted.

His suggestions are fair and reasonable.

The term "Reasonable and Non-discriminatory" 
is indeed uncomfortably vague.

Steve G
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
juha.wiljakka | 3 Jun 2004 07:31
Picon

New draft: IPv6 Host Configuration of Recursive DNS Server


Hi all,

(Firstly, my apologies for cross-posting)

Forwarding Paul's e-mail also on IPv6, v6ops and dhc lists. Your comments on the draft are appreciated on
the dnsop mailing list  dnsop@...  (no
cross-posting, please).

BR,
	-Juha W.-

-----Original Message-----
From: dnsop-v6conf-bounces@...
[mailto:dnsop-v6conf-bounces@...]On Behalf Of ext Jaehoon Paul
Jeong
Sent: 03 June, 2004 04:10
To: dnsop@...
Cc: IPv6 DNS Configuration
Subject: IPv6 Host Configuration of Recursive DNS Server

Hello DNSOP members,

As you know, a new draft has been published for IPv6 Host Configuration of DNS Server Information Approaches:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsop-ipv6-dns-configuration-00.txt

For a long time, DNS Discovery has been discussed at both IPv6 and DNSOP working groups.
The long discussion seems to be resolved through this draft.

In this draft, three approaches are suggested: (a) RA option, (b) DHCPv6 option, and
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Bud Millwood | 3 Jun 2004 09:30

Re: IPR disclosure and <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt>

I strongly agree with Ted as well.

In fact I think it's possible that we could inadvertently marginalize DHCP 
over the long term if we don't ensure that the protocol is free of IPR 
claims.

Bud Millwood
Weird Solutions, Inc.
http://www.weird-solutions.com
tel: +46 8 758 3700
fax: +46 8 758 3687
mailto:budm <at> weird-solutions.com
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Naiming Shen | 3 Jun 2004 19:13

Re: IPR disclosure and <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt>


"free of IPR claims" ?-)

Have you read the page on http://www.ietf.org/ipr.html ?

Regards.

 ] I strongly agree with Ted as well.
 ] 
 ] In fact I think it's possible that we could inadvertently marginalize DHCP 
 ] over the long term if we don't ensure that the protocol is free of IPR 
 ] claims.
 ] 
 ] Bud Millwood
 ] Weird Solutions, Inc.
 ] http://www.weird-solutions.com
 ] tel: +46 8 758 3700
 ] fax: +46 8 758 3687
 ] mailto:budm <at> weird-solutions.com
 ] 
 ] _______________________________________________
 ] dhcwg mailing list
 ] dhcwg <at> ietf.org
 ] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

- Naiming
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Ted Lemon | 3 Jun 2004 23:00

Re: IPR disclosure and <draft-ietf-dhc-subscriber-id-06.txt>

On Jun 3, 2004, at 10:13 AM, Naiming Shen wrote:
> Have you read the page on http://www.ietf.org/ipr.html ?

Personally, I don't care if the RFCs are free from IPR claims, and 
indeed the mere lack of IPR claims in the IETF IPR repository doesn't 
mean no such claims exist.   However, I do think that we shouldn't 
advance drafts to RFC when there are IPR claims on the technology in 
the draft unless either there is a really strong need for the 
technology described in the draft that overrides our concerns about IPR 
issues, or the IPR notice includes a disclaimer that offers real 
protection to implementors as well as to the person who is making the 
IPR claim.

And just to be clear, the IETF's assertions regarding the text of 
internet drafts is a very different thing than patents.   I think we're 
mostly concerned about patents here, although certainly we also don't 
want to put copyrighted text into RFCs where we don't have permission 
to do so.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Heejin Jang | 4 Jun 2004 06:32

I-D ACTION:draft-jang-dhc-haopt-00.txt

Hello all,

I have posted an I-D that describes a DHCP-based mechanism 
to distribute dynamic discovery of  MIPv6 HA and home subnet. 
Any feedback will be highly welcome.

-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.

Title : DHCP Option for Home Agent Discovery in MIPv6
Author(s) : Heejin Jang, Alper Yegin, Jinhyeok Choi
Filename : draft-jang-dhc-haopt-00.txt
Pages : 15
Date : 2004-6-2

   This draft defines a DHCP-based scheme to enable dynamic discovery of
   Mobile IPv6 home agent address and home subnet. A new DHCP option is
   defined to carry the information from a DHCP server to the DHCP
   client running on the mobile node.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jang-dhc-haopt-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
"get draft-jang-dhc-haopt-00.txt".
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane