datatracker.ietf.org
Sign in
Version 5.3.0, 2014-04-12
Report a bug

Adrian Farrel's Statement about IPR related to draft-bhh-mpls-tp-oam-y1731-06 belonging to Nortel Networks Limited

Only those sections of the "Patent Disclosure and Licensing Declaration Template for Notification" where the submitter provided information are displayed.

Update this IPR disclosure. Note: Updates to IPR disclosures must only be made by authorized representatives of the original submitters. Updates will automatically be forwarded to the current Patent Holder's Contact and to the Submitter of the original IPR disclosure.

Submitted Date: December 9, 2010

I. Possible Patent Holder/Applicant ("Patent Holder")
Legal Name: Nortel Networks Limited
II. Contact Information for the IETF Participant Whose Personal Belief Triggered this Disclosure:
Name: Adrian Farrel
Title:
Department:
Address1: Ty Du, Abbey Road
Address2: Llangollen, UK
Telephone: +44 1978 860944
Fax:
Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk
III. IETF Document or Other Contribution to Which this IPR Disclosure Relates:
Internet-Draft:"MPLS-TP OAM based on Y.1731"
(draft-bhh-mpls-tp-oam-y1731-06)
IV. Disclosure of Patent Information (i.e., patents or patent applications required to be disclosed by Section 6 of RFC 3979)
A. For granted patents or published pending patent applications, please provide the following information:
Patent, Serial, Publication, Registration, or Application/File number(s): 2005-99952 2005-99949 2005-99951 2005-99954 2005-99955 2006-0031482
Date(s) granted or applied for: 2005 and 2006
Country: USA
Additional Notes:

Patents are disclosed with ITU-T for Recommendation Y.1731.

draft-bhh-mpls-tp-oam-y1731-06.txt may be a derivative work including material derived from or based on Y.1731.

B. Does this disclosure relate to an unpublished pending patent application?: NO
C. If an Internet-Draft or RFC includes multiple parts and it is not reasonably apparent which part of such Internet-Draft or RFC is alleged to be covered by the patent information disclosed in Section V(A) or V(B), it is helpful if the discloser identifies here the sections of the Internet-Draft or RFC that are alleged to be so covered:
No information submitted