Perhaps the experiement is to see if the purported IPR is enforceable.
________________________________
From: Scott Kitterman [mailto:scott(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com]
Sent: Fri 26/10/2007 4:00 PM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Experimental makes sense for tls-authz
On Friday 26 October 2007 15:32, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
On 2007-10-27 07:04, 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.
I agree. The DOS attack on this list seems to be from people
who haven't read RFC 2026 and use meaningless phrases like
"experimental standard." In fact, publishing this as an experiment
to see if it gets implemented and deployed despite the IPR issue
seems like *exactly* the right thing to do.
Just make sure you aren't running an experiment on the results of ignoring the
IETF rules not having signficant consuequences.
Scott K
_______________________________________________
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