>I'd like the people who want time on the agenda to supply a text (preferably published as an I-D), which summarizes, as clearly as possible: > >- What they think has changed since the last IPR WG evaluation of patent policy > >- What changes in overall direction they think the WG should address > >- What the charter for this activity should look like > >If more than one such proposal should appear, I'd suggest giving each submitter a 5-10 minute slot for making their argument, and leaving at least half an hour for general discussion. > >Please submit I-Ds with the name pattern of draft-<submitter>-ipr-patent-<something> - that would make it easy for us to find them all. > >The timeslot for the WG is Tuesday morning from 0900 to 1130; the rechartering discussion would be within the time from 1030 to 1130. Just to be clear, if someone has the view that documents like Simon's how-to should be within the charter of the working group, but that there are no changes needed to the base policy, do you still want an I-D? Or is a rationale submitted as a short statement enough? Ted _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf