Re: call for consensus on proposed semantic change

On Wednesday, November 24, 2004, at 11:05 PM, Mary Barnes wrote:
> In order to respond to this "yes"/"no" change to semantics to be 
> reflected in the MIB only, I need to point out, in accordance with RFC 
> 3668, that Nortel Networks may have a patent or patent application 
> that may relate to a Contribution or to a portion of this proposed 
> Internet Draft (draft-ietf-midcom-semantics-08), or may potentially be 
> considered necessary for practicing portion(s) of a resulting IETF 
> Standard based on this proposed standard draft.

Just to be clear, does your IPR claim cover something currently in
the draft?

Thanks,

Melinda