ietf-mxcomp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004

2004-09-11 18:31:15

Andrew Newton wrote:

3) On the issue of ignoring patent claims, the working group has at least rough consensus that the patent claims should not be ignored. Additionally, there is at least rough consensus that the participants of the working group cannot accurately describe the specific claims of the patent application. This stems from the fact that the patent application is not publicly available. Given this, it is the opinion of the co-chairs that MARID should not undertake work on alternate algorithms reasonably thought to be covered by the patent application. We do feel that future changes regarding the patent claim or its associated license could significantly change the consensus of the working group, and at such a time it would be appropriate to consider new work of this type.


Are you referring to fetchmail and similar attempts?

...


With regard to items 3 and 4 above, it is also the opinion of the co-chairs that any attempt by the MARID working group to define any new scopes other than "mailfrom" and "pra" for the SPF syntax will at this time result in failure to find consensus within the working group.

The document authors have agreed to producing new drafts intended to meet the chartered work item, and a consensus call on them or the appropriate diffs will be forthcoming. This work plan does not include scopes outside of "mail from" and "pra", and it is our opinion that no new work items of this type should be considered until MARID has successfully produced a first specification.


Andy,

Does this mean that the PRA scope can proceed?

Yakov


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>