Subject: [Tools-discuss] IPR disclosures not sent to WG list

From: Martin Vigoureux <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 23:55:13 +0100

Hi,

it seems that IPR disclosures made against documents which are not WG 
Document are not notified on the WG mailing list.
This seems logical because it is not yet a WG Document, but we've had 
few cases recently in BESS for which we (at least the chairs) would have 
clearly benefited from receiving this notification.

I know that not all I-Ds follow the convention of putting the WG name in 
the file name, but most do.
So would it make sense to notify the chairs and/or the WG list of IPR 
disclosures made against individual I-Ds when those have the WG name in 
the file name?
And if so, would that be possible?

Thanks
-m

---

From: [email-masked] (Dale R. Worley)
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 11:56:59 -0500

> disclosures made against individual I-Ds when those have the WG name in 

OTOH, perhaps the thing to do is when an I-D is promoted to a WG
document, notice of all of its IPR disclosures (and those of any
predecessor documents) is automagically forwarded to the WG list.

Dale

---

From: Martin Vigoureux <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 21:30:01 +0100

Well it depends to which position in time do you precisely mean by "when 
... promoted ..."
My e-mail did not really concern the cases where the IPR disclosures 
happen before a poll for adoption because by looking at the tracker 
before launching the poll we know the IPR status.
I am primarily concerned by disclosures that happen during the poll
because I do not go each and everyday of the poll on the tracker to see 
if the IPR status of the draft being polled has changed.
And, on that matter, if you suggest that the automatic notification be 
sent after we move from "Call for Adoption issued" to "Adopted as WG 
document" then I think it is too late.

-m

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 02:52:40 +0100

> And, on that matter, if you suggest that the automatic notification be sent
> after we move from "Call for Adoption issued" to "Adopted as WG document"
> then I think it is too late.

I don't think it's too late at all.  The earlier, the better, of
course... but any time that's early in the document's working group
life cycle is good.  Working groups can certainly reconsider things in
light of new information, and the document could be abandoned or have
its processing otherwise changed as a result.  Finding out right after
adoption is way better than finding out, say, during WGLC (or later).

Barry

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 14:59:04 +1300

> adoption is way better than finding out, say, during WGLC (or later).

Which raises a question in my mind. If draft-b is tagged as replacing
draft-a, does the tracker automatically link any IPR disclosures
against draft-a to draft-b?

   Brian

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 11:01:50 +0900

> against draft-a to draft-b?

I believe it is supposed to.  I believe it didn't used to, and that
was changed at some point.

But, then, people believe a lot of things, so someone should check.
The IESG certainly *wants* it to work that way.

Barry

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 12:04:26 +0900

It does.

Picking a document arbitrarily:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?submit=draft&id=draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping

---

From: [email-masked] (Dale R. Worley)
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 14:51:20 -0500

> Well it depends to which position in time do you precisely mean by "when 

If I understand your original message correctly, if a draft is logged in
the database as being a WG document, then any new IPR disclosure filed
against it is notified to the WG mailing list.  So my proposal is "When
a document becomes marked as a WG document, all IPR disclosures against
it are notified to the WG mailing list."

Or really:

    For any WG, document, and IPR disclosure, when the condition 'the
    document is a WG document for the WG and the IPR disclosure is against
    the document' transitions from false to true, then a notice of the IPR
    disclosure is sent to the WG mailing list.

Right now, we only act on the transition if it happens because a new IPR
disclosure is filed.  But we also need to act on the transition if it is
because the document becomes a WG document.

Dale

---

From: Martin Vigoureux <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 00:05:46 +0100

Barry,

indeed it is not too late, but if an IPR disclosure comes during an 
adoption call, I believe it is much better to know that immediately 
rather than to discover it after the call has ended.

martin