Brian, I agree that nobody can know in advance if they will have IPR issues at the end. What I am arguing for is that the set of possible end points is known in advance.
________________________________ From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri 19/10/2007 4:34 PM To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip Cc: Simon Josefsson; Tim Polk; ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: A priori IPR choices [Re: Third Last Call: draft-housley-tls-authz-extns] Phill, > If folk can't get their act together when a WG starts then why should we > expect them to be able to do so at the end when we are trying to close the > work? Because of the difference between known unknowns and unknown unknowns. At the beginning, you're asking an entirely hypothetical question about potential patents on undesigned technology. At the end, you're asking a precise question about applied-for or granted patents on specific technology. There's a world of difference, especially since the IETF only requires disclosure of patents reasonably and personally known to the individual contributor. Brian
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
