On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 06:00:42PM +0200, Norbert Bollow wrote: > > I would argue that a GPL implemention is not important to > > interoperability testing as long as there is a BSD-licensed > > implementation. In fact, to the extent that all or most of the > > commercial products are based off of the same BSD-licensed code base, > > this can actually *improve* interoperability. (I may have been > > awarded the 2006 FSF Award for the Advancement of Free Software, but > > if my goal were to make sure that specification was going to get > > widely adopted, I'd use a BSD license, not a GPl license, for the > > reference implementation.) > > I don't disagree with anything that you wrote, but the point here > is that if there's a patent with GPL-incompatible licensing, you > don't have permission to link that BSD-licensed code into a > GPL-licensed program and distribute the result. And I would argue that the above issue is not a matter of concern to the IETF. Having a reference implementation to encourage adoption of the spec, that is of IETF's concern. The issue of GPL requirements is, I would argue, Not Our Problem. - Ted _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf