Re: Intellectual Property Statement for the sampling techniques draft

Hi Nick,

I'm not a lawyer! And I'm happy not to be one. ;)

However, I had to read RFC3667/3668 for the NetFlow IPR.
And I think the draft doesn't comply to it.

First of all, you must insert something like in the draft status
   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of RFC 3668.

Second, I think your statement in the draft violates the rule on blanket statements in RFC3668

6.4.3. The requirement for an IPR disclosure is not satisfied by the
   submission of a blanket statement of possible IPR on every
   Contribution. This is the case because the aim of the disclosure
   requirement is to provide information about specific IPR against
   specific technology under discussion in the IETF. The requirement is
   also not satisfied by a blanket statement of willingness to license
   all potential IPR under fair and non-discriminatory terms for the
   same reason. However, the requirement for an IPR disclosure is
   satisfied by a blanket statement of the IPR discloser's willingness
   to license all of its potential IPR meeting the requirements of
   Section 6.6 (and either Section 6.1.1 or 6.1.2) to implementers of an
   IETF specification on a royalty-free basis as long as any other terms
   and conditions are disclosed in the IPR disclosure statement.

Regards, Benoit-not-a-lawyer

Benoit,

The AT&T disclosure conforms to the requirements of RFC 3668; additional information is not required.

Nick

From: Benoit Claise [mailto:bclaise@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 2:16 AM
To: Duffield,Nicholas G (Nick)
Cc: psamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Intellectual Property Statement for the sampling techniques draft

Nick,

Benoit,

There is a more recent and specific IP statement from AT&T that will be

referred to in the next version of the framework draft:

http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/att-ipr-draft-ietf-psamp-framework.txt

This is good, as this is more specific.
However, shouldn't you mention to which hashing/filtering/sampling technique(s) your IPR refers.

Concerning other assertions of IP rights, I was referring to the

following psamp specific statement from Cisco, which will also be

referred to in the next version:

http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-ietf-psamp-protocol.txt

Very good.

Regards, Benoit.

Nick

-----Original Message-----

From: Benoit Claise [mailto:bclaise@cisco.com]

Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 9:30 PM

To: psamp

Subject: Intellectual Property Statement for the sampling techniques

draft

Hi,

During his session, Nick Duffield mentioned that he wrote an IPR

section

in the sampling techniques draft, and that potentially we might need

one

for NetFlow.

I started to investigate and this leads me to this question.

The IPR statement is pretty vague, specifically if I follow the link

10.

      Intellectual Property Statement

     AT&T Corporation may own intellectual property applicable to

     this

     contribution. The IETF has been notified of AT&T's licensing

     intent for the specification contained in this document. See

     http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/ATT-GENERAL.txt for AT&T's IPR

     statement.

Should we specify exactly which method(s) AT&T has got a patent for?

And

what is the patent number?

For example, the NetFlow IPR is pretty unambiguous.

http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/cisco-claise-netflow.txt

Thanks for shedding some light.

Regards, Benoit.

--

to unsubscribe send a message to psamp-request@ops.ietf.org with

the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.

archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/psamp/>