Re: ISSUE 1: IPR was Re: Section 5.2 (IPR encumberance) in TAK rollover requirement draft

[Russ Mundy <mundy@tislabs.com>]

On 3/8/06 at 5:04 AM -0500, Edward Lewis <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> wrote:

-------------- snip --------------
>
>>>  5.2 No Intellectual Property Encumbrance
>>>
>>>  Because trust anchor rollover is considered "mandatory-to-implement",
>>>  section 8 of [RFC3979] requires that the technology solution chosen must
>>>  be unencumbered or must be available under royalty-free terms.
>
>The first paragraph is okay.
>
--------- snip ------------------

Editor hat ON

My impression was that the requirement in section 5.6 _removed_ automated key
rollover from being a "mandatory-to-implement".  

I think that those speaking for the NOT mandatory-to-implement position were
present in the Vancouver WG meeting but I have not seen any statements to that
effect on the list.

We may need to have statements either way on the 'mandatory-to-implement'
requirement.

Should this be Issue 2??


Russ


--
to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>