At 11:04 AM +0200 10/25/07, Simon Josefsson wrote: >Ted Hardie <hardie@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>>No. My point was that for the IETF, interoperability is the goal, not some >>>general statement about goodness of Free software. In many/most/maybe all >>>cases, this will require any IPR restrictions to be GPL compatible. >> >> Can you think of an open-source project interested in the work of >> CCAMP? > >GNU Zebra, Quagga, and MPLS-linux are three projects that come up by >searching for relevant technology. I'm actually fairly familiar with Quagga, having used it in route-server mode, and it's mind understanding that it and Zebra don't really match the control plane uses of CCAMP. I'm not familiar with MPLS-linux, but I'll take a look at it; thanks for the pointer. >I think you are missing the point, though. The point is to make sure >that a free software implementation of IETF technology is _possible_. >That doesn't necessarily mean that you won't be able to find an IETF WG >with technical work that may not have been implemented already in free >software. The point I'm making, though, is that there really are different development communities working in the IETF. The GMPLS work in CCAMP is control plane work for wavelength, TDMA, and spatial switching networks. Though clearly important to keeping many networks running, it doesn't have the same reach of development interest as many of the other technologies in the IETF. If you were to compare it to the development communities involved in apps groups like CALSIFY or LEMONADE, you would find a very small overlap. Those development communities may well have different priorities in evaluating a license; some may find it problematic to include something that is royalty bearing or requires a reciprocal agreement and some may not. Privileging a development community which might someday arise and whose work might someday get deployment over the folks actually already spending time and effort on developing and deploying a standard is an odd position. Our aim is to make the Internet work, not to advance one kind of license over another. If the Internet will work better using a technology that requires a license incompatible with the GPL or even BSD licenses, then we should let the folks working in that area make that decision. In other words, this is about engineering trade-offs, not ideology. regards, Ted _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf