----- Original Message ----- From: "Barry Leiba" <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> To: "Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: "IETF" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; <ipr@xxxxxxxx>; <iesg@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 8:50 PM > My reading of question 7 is > that the document shepherd have to ask the authors to confirm the IPR > status to their knowledge which is different than just reporting what was > discussed in the WG and which IP statements were submitted. Did I > mis-understand question 7. <snip> As I said in my first note, you're welcome to ask the question in any manner you like, as long as you can comfortably complete the PROTO writeup. The way I've handled it since the change was to ask openly on the WG mailing list. I've asked the editors *and* the participants, but only expected explicit replies (off list) from the editors. This way, all participants were reminded to let the working group know about IPR they're aware of ["reasonably and personally known to the participant" is the specific text from BCP 79, in case you want to use that]. <tp> Barry What might have improved this change to the process, it would have for me, would have been to announce that the process has changed, so that it did not come as a surprise. I saw these open requests on more than one list, guessed that this was a WG-Chair or IESG sponsored initiative, thought back to a recent unfortunate situation that I presumed to be the cause of this process change, and then wondered what should happen for non-WG submissions and what was happening on the WG lists where I saw no public requests. Life would have been simpler if this process change had been announced, ideally on the IETF list as well as on individual WG lists - seeing it on some and not on other WG lists makes one wonder what is going on, time that could be better spent reading the I-Ds in question:-). I was unaware of the link to the write-ups from the IESG page and had not a clue what the status of the documents is - it could be worse, it could have been ION:-( Tom Petch </tp> How you, as a chair, do it, is up to you. And I suggest that "Yes," is a reasonable answer to question 7, and question 8 is the one that wants more words. Barry