Hi Alvaro,
On 7 Nov 2019, at 10:35, Alvaro Retana wrote:
On November 5, 2019 at 6:58:52 PM, Pete Resnick wrote:
Yes, IPR has been declared and the WG has been notified.
----
That seems to indicate that nobody had any comment about the IPR
declaration.
But I also see noted in the shepherd report, "Cisco has an
implementation of
this protocol. No other vendors have indicated plan to implement the
specification".
Not having discussions about IPR is normal in the Routing Area. I
would consider having a discussion about it curious. ;-)
Heh.
The sentence you quoted above from the Shepherd report is incomplete,
it says: “No other vendors have indicated plan to implement the
specification but they support publication of this draft.”
Well, the statement that someone "supports publication of this draft" I
always take as a NOOP. Do they support publication because they like the
author and think the author should have more publications? Or because
they think the writing is poetic? Or because they want the author to
support their own draft next time? Why would they support publication if
they have no plans to implement it?
I don’t
know the reasons why other vendors are not implementing — another
obvious possibility is simply that they don’t have immediate
customer
demand.
Sure, if they think eventually there will be demand and that they'll
implement later, that's a fine reason, and that would indicate that they
don't think they'll have any IPR worries later. That said, the IPR
declaration for this document still shows, "Licensing Declaration to be
Provided Later"; perhaps everybody is fine with RAND for this case.
The extension in this draft requires signaling and coordination
between multiple routers; the dynamic nature of agreeing on which
router is the GDR is what requires interoperability between the
different routers. This type of load balancing can be useful
wherever
multiple PIM DRs exist, so I don’t think it can be considered a
private extension, or applicable only in single-vendor deployments.
If only one vendor implements this and everybody else ignores it, it
still works, right?
Thanks for the careful review and for including interesting notes.
Always willing to cause interesting discussion. :-)
pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
