A quick couple of questions to the list based on a document I saw recently. If a document (an ID in this case) contains encumbered material (in this case consists of 90%+ encumbered material), and the document is authored by the organization (or members of the organization) that holds the encumbrance, should the document contain an IPR disclosure itself or is it sufficient to submit a IPR disclosure through the IETF web interface? Should the ID Nits tool check for the inclusion of the notices for IPR required by section 5.1 of RFC 3978? If a document contains primarily encumbered material, is authored by the owner of the encumbered material or its employees and is a non-work group document, is it appropriate to tag such document as "Intended Status: Standards Track"? For the first question, RFC3979 appears to say no. However, I'm not sure the specific case I cite was considered. For the last question - my guess is that it depends - specifically on the grant of license for the encumbered material and whether or not there are alternatives. Given that, would RAND terms be sufficient in any case to advance this as a standard? Thanks - Mike _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf