This empty appendix was removed in draft 02.
As Russ stated before, an IPR disclosure has been posted to the IETF IPR
page which can be found at:
Stefan Santesson
Program Manager, Standards Liaison
Windows Security
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Strahm [mailto:bill(_at_)strahm(_dot_)net]
Sent: den 20 februari 2006 02:21
To: Russ Housley
Cc: Bill Fenner; tls(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org;
iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; Steven M.
Bellovin
Subject: Re: Last Call: 'TLS User Mapping Extension' to Proposed
Standard
I saw all of the huff, and while I agree with it, I am more concerned
about
Appendix A. IPR Disclosure
TBD
What does that mean, and more specifically is a document with a TBD
section really ready for last call at all ?
Bill
Russ Housley wrote:
I misunderstood the original question. I'll get it fixed or withdraw
the Last Call.
Russ
At 12:38 AM 2/19/2006, Bill Fenner wrote:
Can we have a Proposed Standard
without the IETF having change control?
No. RFC3978 says, in section 5.2 where it describes the derivative
works limitation that's present in draft-santesson-tls-ume, "These
notices may not be used with any standards-track document".
Bill
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf