On 22 Oct 2007 at 17:46 -0400, Sam Hartman allegedly wrote:
* Phil's proposal has been shot down prematurely in my opinion. I
agree that his current version would not fly. However I do think
there are working groups that could make conclusions about their
patent policies and for which doing so would have helped the
effort a lot.
Working Groups have the freedom to do that if they wish. I don't want
a simplistic edict from on high that all working groups must do so.
Interactions between issues, technical and otherwise, are way too
varied and potentially complicated for such shallow rule-making.
Working through draft-housley-tls-authz-extns gave me a personal
significant lack of confidence in our patent policies and whether
they meet our goals and objectives. I also wonder whether our goals
and objectives may have shifted somewhat since they were written.
However I'm definitely uncomfortable with relying on our existing
documents in any real dispute.
I think the problem is that because we have a wide range of opinion
and desired outcome, we cannot create simple rules, which means the
difficult cases take a lot of discussion. I think that's important to
preserve, in order to support the possibility of new outcomes.
swb
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf