Re: IETF 54 calendar

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 02:58 PM 5/28/02 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote:
>Again, I'm not going to object to using meeting time for this kind of session if that's what's needed. But other than Harald's message, I have not heard anything about this since Minneapolis and have not heard folks clamoring for such a meeting. Heck, we haven't seen a proposed agenda for a meeting let alone an I-D. How was it decided that everyone would obviously want to go and that therefore a separate session was needed?

I'd like to see a session on IPR that doesn't conflict with
other meetings.  It would be endlessly great if it could be
declared mandatory :-).  IPR is increasingly a huge nuisance,
and because the current policy is less than completely clear
there's a lot of confusion about it when it comes up.
Although this may not be a problem (until the lawyers show
up) there's not a lot of consistency among working groups.  

Melinda


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]