Simon, You observed: > > Normal IPR disclosure process is to alert the IETF community via > > the IETF > > website that a patent has been filed. I mistakenly thought that > > adding the > > boilerplate IPR statement at the top of the ID was sufficient to > > say what > > needed to be said. However, I don't think IETF requires the > > disclosure of > > an unpublished patent application. > > I believe that is required even for patent applications. RFC 3979 > talks about patent applications in several places. You're right, please let me correct myself again here. My use of the term "disclosure" was sloppy. Here's what I was told by IESG: > >The IESG has been informed by Mark Brown that he had knowledge of the > >September 2005 patent application filed by his employer at the time > >he submitted draft-housley-tls-authz-extns. Accordingly, he was > >obligated to disclose the existence of this patent application upon > >making this submission. Making a required IPR disclosure after a > >draft is approved does not meet the requirement to promptly make the > >disclosure. According to section 7 of RFC 3979 failure to make a > >required disclosure is a failure of process. It should be noted that > >the above disclosure obligations apply to unpublished patent > >applications. When a patent application that is required to be > >disclosed is unpublished, the discloser must 'indicate that the claim > >is based on unpublished patent applications', but is not required to > >list the application number (see RFC 3978 Section 6.4.1). The content of the IETF-required IPR disclosure is this: 1. (YES) "the discloser must 'indicate that the claim is based on unpublished patent applications'" Not these: 2. (NO) "list the application number (see RFC 3978 Section 6.4.1)." 3. (NO) otherwise publish to the IETF the pending patent claims or description of the invention disclosed in any unpublished patent application(s) What I meant to say in my earlier email is that I don't think IETF requires disclosure of the body of the patent application, it's claims, etc. as in (3). I recognize that IETF does require the required IPR disclosure made via http://www.ietf.org/ipr-instructions as described in (1). This probably isn't news to any of you, but I wanted to correct my sloppy use of the term "disclosure". Thanks, mark _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf