Clarification of the Third Party Disclosure Procedure in RFC 3979
RFC 4879

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.

(Jari Arkko) Yes

(Brian Carpenter) Yes

(Lars Eggert) Yes

(Ted Hardie) Yes

(Russ Housley) Yes

Comment (2007-01-05)
No email
send info
  Please pick one spelling: "3rd" or "third"

  Please include the folloing in the heading on the title page:
  "Updates: 3979 (once approved)"

(Ross Callon) No Objection

(Bill Fenner) No Objection

(Cullen Jennings) No Objection

(David Kessens) No Objection

(Jon Peterson) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu) No Objection

Comment (2007-01-08)
No email
send info
The recommended change is 'changing the word "discloser" to "IPR holder" in the above text' which will make the respective sentence in the text: 

'the IETF
Executive Director shall request from the IPR holder of such IPR,
a written assurance ...' 

Is the repetition intentional? or should the change rather be just "discloser" to "holder"?

(Mark Townsley) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Sam Hartman) Abstain

Comment (2007-01-10)
No email
send info
We do not need yet another diff to the ipr specs.  Fold this one in
with real revisions.