> > My druthers would be to have an IETF policy explicitly saying > > that the first choice is to use unencumbered technology if it > > can be made to work, second choice is encumbered but > > royalty-free technology, and last choice is "fair and reasonable > > licence terms" (or whatever the equivalent correct legal wording > > might be for that last). > > and if one solution is 120% better technically than another, but has a > RAND license associated with it? What if it's 170% better?
working groups make trade-offs all the time between simplicity, functionality, and so on. licensing is another cost. given the amount of traffic on this topic, it appears that licensing is a very heavy cost. this may provide an answer to your question... /mtr
