Subject: [OPSAWG] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-opsawg-mibs-to-ieee80231-00

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 14:45:23 -0400

Dear OpsAWG WG,

The authors of draft-ietf-opsawg-mibs-to-ieee80231-00 have indicated
that they believe that the document is ready, and have asked for
Working Group Last Call.

The draft is available here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-mibs-to-ieee80231-00/

Please review this draft to see if you think it is ready for
publication and send comments to the list, clearly stating your view.

This WGLC ends Tue 07-Oct-2014.

In addition, to satisfy RFC 6702 ("Promoting Compliance with
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)"):
Are you personally aware of any IPR that applies to
draft-ietf-opsawg-mibs-to-ieee80231-00?  If so, has this IPR been
disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules? (See RFCs 3979, 4879,
3669, and 5378 for more details.)

Thanks,
Warren Kumari
(as OpsAWG WG co-chair)

-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 06:08:12 -0400

I am personally unaware of any IPR associated with the subject draft.

Tom Taylor

---

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 10:16:47 +0000

Same here, I am not aware about any IPR associated with this I-D. 

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: OPSAWG [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Tom Taylor
> Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1:08 PM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-opsawg-mibs-to-
> ieee80231-00
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

---

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 12:11:14 -0400

A reminder that this WGLC closes in a week.

This is a really short document -- if you ignore the boilerplate, and
the list of MIBs it is probably around a page and a half of short,
easy text.

We'd appreciate some review, but, to be honest, even if we don't get
any I'm planning on submitting this -- it basically just documents
what we've already done...

So, please save me from having to explain to the IESG why I'm
submitting a document with no review, take 5 minutes and read the
doc...

W

---

From: "ietfdbh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 13:54:10 -0400

Hi,

I reviewed this document.
This document references a lot of the material in RFC4663.
As the author of RFC4663, from my perspective, it is good to go.

The IESG write-up should probably include discussion about copyright and
IPR.
RFC4663 discusses legal concerns about copyright and IPR for the bridge MIB
modules; this document merely references RFC4663.
I believe this is adequate, given what we found when considering the
transfer documented in RFC4663.
1) The IETF retains the original copyrights granted by the authors, for both
publication of the IETF versions of the document and any derivative works
done within the IETF standards process.
The IEEE needs to get permission from the authors to develop derivative
works.
This is between IEEE and the authors and does not involve the IETF.
2) Any IPR claimed against the IETF version remains relative to the IETF
versions.
The IEEE has its own rules for declaring IPR related to IEEE documents, and
the need to declare IPR related to the IEEE versions is between IEEE and the
IPR holders.

David Harrington
[email-masked]
+1-603-828-1401
> From: OPSAWG [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Warren
> Kumari
> Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 12:11 PM
> To: [email-masked]; draft-ietf-opsawg-mibs-to-ieee80231-
> [email-masked]; [email-masked]