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
:30 PM
To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
Cc: Simon Josefsson; Tim Polk; ietf@ietf.org
Subject: A priori IPR choices [Re: Third Last Call:
draft-housley-tls-authz-extns]
On 2007-10-19 05:47, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
...
What I would suggest is that new working groups be required to specify
Scott Brim wrote:
On 19 Oct 2007 at 10:30 +1300, Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote:
On 2007-10-19 05:47, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
What I would suggest is that new working groups be required to
specify the governing IPR rules in their charter
...
Violent disagreement. That would make
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
On 2007-10-19 05:47, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
...
What I would suggest is that new working groups be required to specify the
governing IPR rules in their charter, these would be either that all IPR must
be offered according to an open grant on W3C terms or that the working group
specifies
On 19 Oct 2007 at 10:30 +1300, Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote:
On 2007-10-19 05:47, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
What I would suggest is that new working groups be required to
specify the governing IPR rules in their charter, these would be
either that all IPR must be offered according
