[rfc-i] RFCs and IPRs

Marshall Eubanks tme at americafree.tv
Mon Oct 18 10:55:01 PDT 2010


On Oct 18, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Scott O. Bradner wrote:

> 
> Bob sez:
>> we don't require IPR disclosure to publish on the independent stream
>> (and other non-IETF streams?)
> 
> according to 
> http://www.ietf.org/id-info/guidelines.html
> 
> all IDs must include the text 
> "This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with 
> the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79"
> 
> BCP 79 requires disclosure of IPR

With the except of April 1 RFCs, all RFCs (of whatever stream) are
supposed to be Internet-Drafts first, so IPR should be disclosed on all
RFCs.

> 
> so I think that we do require IPR disclosure for non-IETF documents

And I would agree.

Regards
Marshall

> (and, historically, many of the IPR disclosures refer to non-IETF
> IDs)
> 
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list