Re: last call on Raptor publication

I am in favor of option a. It will be interesting to hear the IESG's  
reaction.

Regards
Marshall

On Jun 5, 2006, at 3:14 PM, Lorenzo Vicisano wrote:

> As you know, Digital Fountain changed the IPR statement for the FEC ID
> Raptor (draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-raptor-object) withdrawing the "RAND"
> terms (please see the email that Mark Watson sent to this list,
> attached below).
>
> This thread is to settle once for all the position of the RMT WG on
> this issue, in particular regarding whether and how the WG wants to
> sponsor raptor for publication.
>
> We have the options of:
>
>   a) asking the IESG to publish raptor as a Standard-Track document
>      (as originally planned).
>   b) abandoning raptor as a WG standard
>   c) asking the IESG to publish raptor as experimental or
>      informational. Note that this might create problems with the
>      IANA allocation of FEC IDs etc.
>
> This issue was already discussed on this list and at the last IETF
> meeting (Dallas). So far we have had some comments in favor of option
> a) and no comments against it.
>
> Please express your opinion by June 19th. If we have no feedback
> by then, we will assume that the WG wishes to go for a), given the
> previous discussions.
>
> 	thank you,
> 	Lorenzo
>
> ################# Mark's email attached below #######################
>
> All,
>
>
>
> As most of you are aware, Digital Fountain has to date been promoting
> our core technology, DF Raptor, as an open standard in IETF RMT and
> elsewhere, for any and all applications.  This mail is to let you know
> about a change to that strategy: As a result of a recent, significant
> new relationship that is crucial to Digital Fountain with a prime
> contractor in the defense industry, our approach going forward will be
> to promote Raptor as an open standard for specific markets and
> applications  including of course 3GPP and DVB standards where Raptor
> has already been adopted and others in future.
>
>
>
> However, this means revising the IPR statement that we have made to
> the IETF regarding draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-raptor-object because, whilst
> we still offer RAND terms for specific standards such as 3GPP and DVB,
> we are no longer able to offer RAND terms independent of market and
> application.
>
>
>
> Going forward, there are several options regarding
> draft-ietf-rmt-fec-raptor-object, including not publishing it at all.
> This is of course a decision for the IETF and Digital Fountain will
> not take a position in that discussion.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Mark Watson
>
> Digital Fountain
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rmt mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmt