>>>>> "John" == John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> writes:
John> --On Saturday, March 26, 2016 08:40 +1300 Brian E Carpenter
John> <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It's clear that any design team *output* is a contribution. But
>> if a group of friends have a chat over lunch, not as a design
>> team mandated by WG chairs, and one of them mentions a silly idea
>> that is rejected in favour of a good idea that the group later
>> proposes to the WG, is that silly idea a contribution? I don't
>> think so.
If it's a design team that thinks of itself as a design team, I really
want the silly idea to count as an IETF contribution.
If I get together with you to do IETF work, part of why I'm willing to
do so is because we've agreed that you'll disclose any IP. If I'm doing
IETF work with you, I want you to be obligated to disclose by the time
you're advocating for a specific position.
As an individual who may some day again contribute to the IETF, that's
really important to me.
Now, there's ambiguity. I realize a group of friends involved in the
IETF can get together for purposes other than IETF work.
However, speaking for myself, I'd be less willing to do work in an IETF
where a lunchtime discussion for IETF work didn't count as contributions
than one where it did.
I think waiting for an idea to be presented in an ID, at the microphone,
or on a list is too late.
A lot of advocacy for positions happens before then, and you can get in
bad IPR situations if you are not required to disclose by the time that
advocacy starts.
--Sam