[Ecn-sane] L4S Last Call session

[Ecn-sane] L4S Last Call session

[Jonathan Morton]

I thought it wise to note here, for the information of interested parties, that a hearing on L4S' WGLC will take place during the opening of today's TSVWG session.  The discussion points raised in advance are summarised in these slides prepared by David Black:

	https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-tsvwg-sessa-5-l4s-discussion-01

Pete, Rod and I will of course be present, and we plan to raise several of these points in detail.  I believe it is also possible to raise points from this list remotely.  I think some people here are particularly interested in the final point on the list, about IPR.

Please be civil…

 - Jonathan Morton

Re: [Ecn-sane] L4S Last Call session

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> writes:

> I thought it wise to note here, for the information of interested
> parties, that a hearing on L4S' WGLC will take place during the
> opening of today's TSVWG session. The discussion points raised in
> advance are summarised in these slides prepared by David Black:
>
> 	https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-tsvwg-sessa-5-l4s-discussion-01
>
> Pete, Rod and I will of course be present, and we plan to raise
> several of these points in detail. I believe it is also possible to
> raise points from this list remotely. I think some people here are
> particularly interested in the final point on the list, about IPR.

Sadly the timing doesn't work out for remote participation for me. As
for the L4S IPR claims, I believe (after consultation with the Red Hat
legal council) the back-and-forth on the list have improved matters
somewhat by clarifying that there's a FRAND fallback to lessen the
leverage afforded by the termination clause. What this means is that the
IPR claim is now on par with what there's precedence for in IETF working
groups.

As for open source, though, I'm not sure that's enough. For Linux, any
remaining concerns could be cleared up by an updated upstream submission
by the patent holder, with a clear acknowledgement of the GPLv2 patent
grant. I plan to run this by the Red Hat council as well if and when
such a submission appears.

I don't feel competent to comment on where this leaves the BSDs (and
other non-GPL open source projects)...

-Toke

Re: [Ecn-sane] L4S Last Call session

[Wesley Eddy]

On 7/26/2019 11:08 AM, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> I thought it wise to note here, for the information of interested parties, that a hearing on L4S' WGLC will take place during the opening of today's TSVWG session.  The discussion points raised in advance are summarised in these slides prepared by David Black:
>
> 	https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-tsvwg-sessa-5-l4s-discussion-01
>
> Pete, Rod and I will of course be present, and we plan to raise several of these points in detail.  I believe it is also possible to raise points from this list remotely.  I think some people here are particularly interested in the final point on the list, about IPR.
>
> Please be civil…


I agree, anyone interested should participate.  There is remote 
participation available through:

http://www.meetecho.com/ietf105/tsvwg/

I just wanted to clarify a couple points (since I'm the document 
shepherd assigned for the L4S suite at the moment):

- There has not been any working group last call yet on any of the L4S 
documents, though we have a milestone to be trying to get there soon.

- We (TSVWG chairs) see some items coming up in discussions that look 
like they'd block us from wanting to have a working group last call at 
the moment.  There may be a mixture of things that need more experiment 
data, things that need revised text clarifications, other 
misunderstandings, etc.

- The plan is to have open mic time in the working group to work through 
these, and figure out how close or far we are from being ready for a 
working group last call.