Subject: [tsvwg] Summary: IPR Declarations on draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled

From: "Black, David" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:49:48 +0000

As promised, this note summarizes the off-list discussions on this topic.

The following summary is sent in my role as WG Chair, and is intended as guidance to the Working Group (WG):

  1.  Background:

  *   Section 7 of RFC 8179 and all of RFC 3669 are important background to this discussion of intellectual property concerns  - reading both of them before responding to this note is RECOMMENDED.
  *   The two IPR Disclosures involved are 3561 and 3562 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3561/ and https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/3562/).

  1.  IPR Disclosures and IETF Technology Evaluation in general:

  *   The IETF and the IESG in particular disclaim responsibility for evaluating IPR Disclosures.  WG participants are expected to reach their own conclusions, consulting their own legal counsel if/as appropriate.
  *   IPR Disclosures, including license terms, are inputs to WG evaluation of technology.  WG evaluation of technology is expected to be broad, considering all factors, and not tightly focused on license terms or IPR Disclosures.
  *   An important factor for the WG to consider is applicability of the patent to the technology of interest to the WG - see Section 5.5 of RFC 3669.   That factor is left for the WG to discuss further as part of WG evaluation of technology.
  *   The WG mailing list is an important forum for WG activity, hence discussion of license terms on the mailing list as part of WG evaluation of technology is acceptable.

  1.  The IPR Disclosures on the aqm-dualq-coupled draft and the concern that led to the off-list discussion:

  *   The license terms involved in the original concern are called "Defensive Suspension" or "Defensive Termination" - e.g., see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_termination.
  *   The original concern involves the broad scope of the "Defensive Suspension" terms in the IPR Disclosures, specifically that Defensive Suspension is triggered by assertion of any patent(s) whatsoever against the patent holder.
  *   Perusal of recent IPR disclosures to the IETF (see https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/#specific) indicates that similar Defensive Suspension terms are common.
  *   The WG remains free to evaluate the degree of acceptability (or lack thereof) of these Defensive Suspension terms to this specific WG for this specific technology as part of overall WG evaluation of technology.

A number of additional topics were raised in the off-list discussion but no conclusions were drawn.   Participants in that discussion may (and are likely to) bring those topics to the list for further discussion.

Thanks, --David (TSVWG WG co-chair)
----------------------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Distinguished Engineer
Dell EMC, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (774) 350-9323 New    Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
----------------------------------------------------------------