Randy Presuhn wrote:
Hi -
The existence of IPR claims potentially relevant to the
implementation of a specification has never been sufficient
grounds to block the publication of that specification as an
RFC. Given the unfortunate history of this work, publication
of draft-housley-tls-authz-extns as experimental seems to be
the most sensible path out of this mess.
If the IPR terms are indeed so onerous as to preclude
widespread implementation, as seems to be the concern of
some, then it will simply gather dust with other
"experiments" that didn't work out, and the open source
community need not worry. If, on the other hand, this
technology is so superior to anything the open source
community can offer as an alternative, then Darwin will go to work.
None of the recent argumentation has been technical. None of
the recent argumentation has provided a convincing procedural
reason to block publication of draft-housley-tls-authz-extns.
Let's just hand it over to the RFC editor and be done with it.
Randy
+1
If there is a technical reason for opposing the publication of this as
an Experimental RFC, please make that argument. Otherwise, let the
Experimental RFC track do what it was designed to do, and determine what
interest (if any) there is in this technology in the industry.
regards,
Chuck
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf