ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IETF 54 calendar

2002-05-29 00:40:15
On Tue, 28 May 2002, Melinda Shore wrote:

At 02:58 PM 5/28/02 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote:
Again, I'm not going to object to using meeting time for this kind of
session if that's what's needed. But other than Harald's message, I
have not heard anything about this since Minneapolis and have not heard
folks clamoring for such a meeting. Heck, we haven't seen a proposed
agenda for a meeting let alone an I-D. How was it decided that everyone
would obviously want to go and that therefore a separate session was
needed?

I'd like to see a session on IPR that doesn't conflict with other
meetings. It would be endlessly great if it could be declared mandatory
:-).  IPR is increasingly a huge nuisance, and because the current
policy is less than completely clear there's a lot of confusion about it
when it comes up. Although this may not be a problem (until the lawyers
show up) there's not a lot of consistency among working groups.

I think that would be very useful if a couple of lawyers showed up in an
IPR session, listened to the comments and warned us for things that are
illegal or not legally implementable.

Henk

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                    Email: 
henk(_dot_)uijterwaal(_at_)ripe(_dot_)net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre     WWW: http://www.ripe.net/home/henk
Singel 258                         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1016 AB Amsterdam                    Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands                   Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That problem that we weren't having yesterday, is it better? (Big ISP NOC)



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