[rfc-i] RFCs and IPRs

Julian Reschke julian.reschke at gmx.de
Tue Oct 19 05:22:40 PDT 2010


On 18.10.2010 15:01, 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
>
> so I think that we do require IPR disclosure for non-IETF documents
> (and, historically, many of the IPR disclosures refer to non-IETF
> IDs)

<http://www.ietf.org/id-info/guidelines.html> says:

"Any I-D submission which does not include one of these statements will 
be returned to the submitter. The IETF Secretariat will NOT add this 
text for the author."

That may be true, but at least in one case it hasn't stopped the author 
to *add* statements to the copyright section; see 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pantos-http-live-streaming-04>; is 
this something that should have been rejected?

Best regards, Julian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list