Brian,
I agree that nobody can know in advance if they will have IPR issues at the end. What I am arguing for is that the set of possible end points is known in advance.
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Fri 19/10/2007 4:34 PM
To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
Cc: Simon Josefsson; Tim Polk; ietf@xxxxxxxx
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 to close the work?
Because of the difference between known unknowns and unknown unknowns.
At the beginning, you're asking an entirely hypothetical question about potential patents on undesigned technology.
At the end, you're asking a precise question about applied-for or granted patents on specific technology.
There's a world of difference, especially since the IETF only requires disclosure of patents reasonably and personally known to
the individual contributor.
Brian
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf