Re: Agent IPR issues (was Re: Secure Shell WG: what's left?)

[Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld%sun.com@localhost>]

On Wed, 2005-08-10 at 06:48, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
> At the time that draft was written, the text you quoted was the standard 
> boilerplate to be used when an IPR claim had been received that was alleged 
> or believed to apply to that document.  Since then, I believe the 
> boilerplate has been changed such that it doesn't say whether there is a 
> specific claim related to this document, consistent with the IETF's policy 
> of not taking positions wrt IPR claims.

I believe the "there are IPR claims" notice was added due to the
trademark issue.

> > No IPR disclosures related to draft-ietf-secsh-agent have been
> > submitted

To my knowledge, no IPR disclosures related to the trademark were ever
filed.  The IETF IPR disclosure process has subsequently been made
patent-specific.

> I did rather more searches than that, and I couldn't come up with anything, 
> either.

As of shortly before the core drafts were approved, the ietf process for
trademark references was fixed to permit documents to reference the 
registration authority for a claimed trademark.  This is generally
necessary only when a listed author/contributor is the trademark
registrant or is bound by an agreement with the trademark registrant to
identify that a word is trademarked.

					- Bill