I’m not aware of any IPR. Cheers, Clarence
*From:*rtgwg [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Chris Bowers *Sent:* Tuesday, June 20, 2017 12:26 PM *To:* RTGWG <[email protected]> *Cc:* [email protected] *Subject:* RE: WG last call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay RTGWG, The consensus appears to be for the WG to request publication of this draft as a standards track document. We still need IPR responses from two of the authors before we can proceed. Thanks, Chris and Jeff _____________________________________________ *From:* Chris Bowers *Sent:* Friday, June 2, 2017 3:43 PM *To:* RTGWG <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> *Subject:* WG last call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay RTGWG, This email starts the two week WG last call for draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-uloop-delay/ Please indicate support for or opposition to the publication of this standards track document, along with the reasoning for that support or opposition. IPR: If you are listed as a document author or contributor, please respond to this email stating whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The response needs to be sent to the RTGWG mailing list. The document will not advance to the next stage until a response has been received from each author and each individual that has contributed to the document. The document currently has the following IPR disclosure associated with it. https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2565/ This last call will end on Friday June 16th. Thanks, Chris and Jeff
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
