What Jorge said. You can discuss on the IPR list at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg Jari On Feb 10, 2014, at 9:13 AM, Jorge Contreras <cntreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This is a healthy discussion. However, if you really care about these issues (i.e., what constitutes "participation" in an IETF discussion for purposes of triggering an IPR disclosure) then debating it in the context of the "Note Well" language is, to put it mildly, a waste of time. The actual "rules" that govern this issue are contained in BCP79, which is in the process of being revised right now. This exact issue has been discussed repeatedly in the IPR WG and the rules in BCP79 are being amended *right now* to deal with concerns that were raised. If you care and want to discuss in some way that may actually affect the IETF rules, rather than a non-substantive pointer to the rules (i.e., "Note Well"), please take a look at the latest I-D implementing these rules and comment on it: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bradner-rfc3979bis/ > > The relevant Sections are 1.c ("Contribution") and 1.k, which actually defines "Participating in an IETF Discussion or Activity". > > Enjoy! > > Jorge