Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Bradner
Request for Comments: 8179 Harvard University
BCP: 79 J. Contreras
Obsoletes: 3979, 4879 University of Utah
Updates: 2026 May 2017
Category: Best Current Practice
ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) S. Bradner
Request for Comments: 8179 Harvard University
BCP: 79 J. Contreras
Obsoletes: 3979, 4879 University of Utah
Updates: 2026 May 2017
Category: Best Current Practice
ISSN: 2070-1721
Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology
IETF技术中的知识产权
Abstract
摘要
The IETF policies about Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), such as patent rights, relative to technologies developed in the IETF are designed to ensure that IETF working groups and participants have as much information as possible about any IPR constraints on a technical proposal as early as possible in the development process. The policies are intended to benefit the Internet community and the public at large, while respecting the legitimate rights of IPR holders. This document sets out the IETF policies concerning IPR related to technology worked on within the IETF. It also describes the objectives that the policies are designed to meet. This document updates RFC 2026 and, with RFC 5378, replaces Section 10 of RFC 2026. This document also obsoletes RFCs 3979 and 4879.
IETF与IETF中开发的技术相关的知识产权（IPR）政策（如专利权）旨在确保IETF工作组和参与者在开发过程中尽早获得关于技术提案的任何知识产权限制的尽可能多的信息。这些政策旨在使互联网社区和广大公众受益，同时尊重知识产权持有人的合法权利。本文件规定了IETF关于IETF内工作技术相关知识产权的政策。它还描述了政策旨在实现的目标。本文件更新了RFC 2026，并用RFC 5378取代了RFC 2026第10节。本文件还淘汰了RFC 3979和4879。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This memo documents an Internet Best Current Practice.
本备忘录记录了互联网最佳实践。
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on BCPs is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
本文件是互联网工程任务组（IETF）的产品。它代表了IETF社区的共识。它已经接受了公众审查，并已被互联网工程指导小组（IESG）批准出版。有关BCP的更多信息，请参见RFC 7841第2节。
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8179.
有关本文件当前状态、任何勘误表以及如何提供反馈的信息，请访问http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8179.
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2017 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括信托法律条款第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可证文本，并提供简化BSD许可证中所述的无担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Participation in the IETF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1. General Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2. Rights and Permissions in Contributions. . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3. Obligations on Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Actions for Documents for Which IPR Disclosure(s)
Have Been Received . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. IPR Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. Who Must Make an IPR Disclosure? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1.1. A Contributor's IPR in His or Her Contribution . . . . . 10
5.1.2. An IETF Participant's IPR in Contributions by Others . . 10
5.1.3. IPR of Others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. The Timing of Providing Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.1. Timing of Disclosure under Section 5.1.1 . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.2. Timing of Disclosure under Section 5.1.2 . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.3. Timing of Disclosure by ADs and Others . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3. How Must an IPR Disclosure be Made? . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4. What Must be in an IPR Disclosure? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4.1. Content of IPR Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4.2. Updating IPR Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4.3. Blanket IPR Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.5. Licensing Information in an IPR Disclosure . . . . . . . . . 14
5.6. Level of Control over IPR Requiring Disclosure . . . . . . . 15
5.7. Disclosures for Oral Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.8. General Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Failure to Disclose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. Evaluating Alternative Technologies in IETF Working Groups . . 17
8. Change Control for Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9. Licensing Requirements to Advance Standards Track
IETF Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10. No IPR Disclosures in IETF Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11. Application to Non-IETF Stream Documents . . . . . . . . . . 19
12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
13. Changes since RFCs 3979 and 4879 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Editors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Participation in the IETF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1. General Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2. Rights and Permissions in Contributions. . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3. Obligations on Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Actions for Documents for Which IPR Disclosure(s)
Have Been Received . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. IPR Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. Who Must Make an IPR Disclosure? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1.1. A Contributor's IPR in His or Her Contribution . . . . . 10
5.1.2. An IETF Participant's IPR in Contributions by Others . . 10
5.1.3. IPR of Others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. The Timing of Providing Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.1. Timing of Disclosure under Section 5.1.1 . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.2. Timing of Disclosure under Section 5.1.2 . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.3. Timing of Disclosure by ADs and Others . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3. How Must an IPR Disclosure be Made? . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4. What Must be in an IPR Disclosure? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4.1. Content of IPR Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4.2. Updating IPR Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4.3. Blanket IPR Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.5. Licensing Information in an IPR Disclosure . . . . . . . . . 14
5.6. Level of Control over IPR Requiring Disclosure . . . . . . . 15
5.7. Disclosures for Oral Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.8. General Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. Failure to Disclose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. Evaluating Alternative Technologies in IETF Working Groups . . 17
8. Change Control for Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
9. Licensing Requirements to Advance Standards Track
IETF Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10. No IPR Disclosures in IETF Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11. Application to Non-IETF Stream Documents . . . . . . . . . . 19
12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
13. Changes since RFCs 3979 and 4879 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
14.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
14.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Editors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
The following definitions are for terms used in the context of this document. Other terms, including "IESG," "ISOC," "IAB," and "RFC Editor," are defined in [RFC2028].
以下定义适用于本文件中使用的术语。[RFC2028]中定义了其他术语，包括“IESG”、“ISOC”、“IAB”和“RFC编辑器”。
a. "Alternate Stream": the IAB Document Stream, the IRTF Document Stream, and the Independent Submission Stream, each as defined in Section 5.1 of [RFC4844], along with any future non-IETF streams that might be defined.
a. “替代流”：IAB文件流、IRTF文件流和独立提交流，每一个都在[RFC4844]第5.1节中定义，以及任何可能定义的未来非IETF流。
b. "Blanket IPR Statement" or "Blanket Disclosure": see Section 5.4.3.
b. “全面知识产权声明”或“全面披露”：见第5.4.3节。
c. "Contribution": any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made within the context of an IETF activity, in each case that is intended to affect the IETF Standards Process or that is related to the activity of an Alternate Stream that has adopted this policy.
c. “贡献”：投稿人向IETF提交的任何拟作为互联网草案或RFC全部或部分发布的文件，以及在IETF活动背景下所作的任何声明，在每种情况下，其目的是影响IETF标准过程或与采用本政策的替代流的活动相关。
Such statements include oral statements, as well as written and electronic communications, which are addressed to:
此类声明包括口头声明以及书面和电子通信，发送至：
o any IETF plenary session,
o IETF全体会议，
o any IETF working group (WG; see BCP 25) or portion thereof or any WG chair on behalf of the relevant WG,
o 任何IETF工作组（工作组；见BCP 25）或其部分或代表相关工作组的任何工作组主席，
o any IETF "birds of a feather" (BOF) session or portion thereof,
o 任何IETF“羽毛鸟”（BOF）会议或其部分，
o WG design teams (see BCP 25) and other design teams that intend to deliver an output to IETF, or portions thereof,
o 工作组设计团队（见BCP 25）和其他打算向IETF或其部分交付输出的设计团队，
o the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG,
o IESG或代表IESG的任何成员，
o the IAB, or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB,
o IAB或代表IAB的任何成员，
o any IETF mailing list, web site, chat room, or discussion board operated by or under the auspices of the IETF, including the IETF list itself,
o 由IETF运营或赞助的任何IETF邮件列表、网站、聊天室或讨论板，包括IETF列表本身，
o the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function.
o RFC编辑器或Internet草稿功能。
Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list, or other function, or that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group, or function, are not Contributions in the context of this document. And while the IETF's IPR rules apply in all
在IETF会话、邮件列表或其他功能之外作出的声明，或明确不打算输入到IETF活动、组或功能的声明，均不属于本文件上下文中的贡献。尽管IETF的知识产权规则适用于所有领域
cases, not all presentations represent a Contribution. For example, many invited plenary, area-meeting, or research group presentations will cover useful background material, such as general discussions of existing Internet technology and products, and will not be a Contribution. (Some such presentations can represent a Contribution as well, of course). Throughout this document, the term "written Contribution" is used. For purposes of this document, "written" means reduced to a written or visual form in any language and any media, permanent or temporary, including but not limited to traditional documents, email messages, discussion board postings, slide presentations, text messages, instant messages, and transcriptions of oral statements.
在案例中，并非所有的演示都代表一种贡献。例如，许多受邀的全体会议、区域会议或研究小组演讲将涵盖有用的背景材料，如对现有互联网技术和产品的一般性讨论，而不是贡献。（当然，有些这样的演讲也可以是一种贡献）。本文件通篇使用“书面贡献”一词。在本文件中，“书面”指任何语言和任何媒体的书面或视觉形式，永久或临时，包括但不限于传统文件、电子邮件、讨论板帖子、幻灯片演示、短信、即时消息和口头陈述的抄本。
d. "Contributor": an individual submitting a Contribution
d. “贡献者”：提交贡献的个人
e. "Covers" or "Covered": a valid claim of a patent or a patent application (including a provisional patent application) in any jurisdiction, or any other Intellectual Property Right, would necessarily be infringed by the exercise of a right (e.g., making, using, selling, importing, distribution, copying, etc.) with respect to an Implementing Technology. For purposes of this definition, "valid claim" means a claim of any unexpired patent or patent application which shall not have been withdrawn, cancelled, or disclaimed, nor held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction in an unappealed or unappealable decision.
e. “覆盖范围”或“覆盖范围”：任何司法管辖区内的专利或专利申请（包括临时专利申请）的有效权利要求，或任何其他知识产权，在行使权利（例如，制造、使用、销售、进口、分发、复制等）时必然受到侵犯关于实现技术。在本定义中，“有效权利要求”是指任何未过期的专利或专利申请的权利要求，该权利要求不得被具有管辖权的法院在未被上诉或不可上诉的判决中撤回、取消或放弃，也不得被认定为无效。
f. "General Disclosure": see Section 5.8.
f. “一般披露”：见第5.8节。
g. "IETF": In the context of this document, the IETF includes all individuals who participate in meetings, working groups, mailing lists, functions, and other activities that are organized or initiated by ISOC, the IESG, or the IAB under the general designation of the Internet Engineering Task Force, or IETF, but solely to the extent of such participation.
g. “IETF”：在本文件中，IETF包括所有参加由ISOC、IESG或IAB在互联网工程任务组（IETF）的总体指定下组织或发起的会议、工作组、邮件列表、职能和其他活动的个人，但仅限于此类参与的范围。
h. "IETF Documents": RFCs and Internet-Drafts that are published as part of the IETF Standards Process. These are also referred to as "IETF Stream Documents" as defined in Section 5.1.1 of [RFC4844].
h. “IETF文件”：作为IETF标准过程的一部分发布的RFC和互联网草案。这些文件也称为[RFC4844]第5.1.1节中定义的“IETF流文件”。
i. "IETF Standards Process": the activities undertaken by the IETF in any of the settings described in the above definition of Contribution. The IETF Standards Process may include participation in activities and publication of documents that are not directed toward the development of IETF standards or specifications, such as the development and publication of Informational and Experimental documents (see Section 4 of [RFC2026]).
i. “IETF标准过程”：IETF在上述贡献定义中所述的任何环境中开展的活动。IETF标准过程可能包括参与活动和发布非针对IETF标准或规范的文件，如信息和实验文件的开发和发布（见[RFC2026]第4节）。
j. "IPR" or "Intellectual Property Rights": means a patent, utility model, or similar right that may Cover an Implementing Technology, whether such rights arise from a registration or renewal thereof, or an application therefore, in each case anywhere in the world. See [RFC5378] for a discussion of trademarks.
j. “知识产权”或“知识产权”：指可能涉及实施技术的专利、实用新型或类似权利，无论此类权利是由注册或更新产生的，还是在世界任何地方的申请产生的。有关商标的讨论，请参见[RFC5378]。
k. "Implementing Technology": a technology that implements an IETF specification or standard.
k. “实施技术”：实施IETF规范或标准的技术。
l. "Internet-Draft": a document used in the IETF and RFC Editor processes, as described in Section 2.2 of [RFC2026].
l. “互联网草案”：IETF和RFC编辑器过程中使用的文件，如[RFC2026]第2.2节所述。
m. "Participating in an IETF discussion or activity": making a Contribution, as described above, or in any other way acting in order to influence the outcome of a discussion relating to the IETF Standards Process. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, acting as a Working Group Chair or Area Director constitutes "Participating" in all activities of the relevant working group(s) he or she is responsible for in an area. "Participant" and "IETF Participant" mean any individual Participating in an IETF discussion or activity.
m. “参与IETF讨论或活动”：如上文所述，做出贡献，或以任何其他方式影响与IETF标准过程相关的讨论结果。在不限制上述一般性的情况下，担任工作组主席或区域主任构成“参与”他或她在某个区域负责的相关工作组的所有活动。“参与者”和“IETF参与者”是指参与IETF讨论或活动的任何个人。
m. "Reasonably and personally known": something an individual knows personally or, because of the job the individual holds, would reasonably be expected to know. This wording is used to indicate that an organization cannot purposely keep an individual in the dark about patents or patent applications just to avoid the disclosure requirement. But this requirement should not be interpreted as requiring the IETF Contributor or Participant (or his or her represented organization, if any) to perform a patent search to find applicable IPR.
m. “合理和个人知晓”：个人知道的事情，或由于个人所从事的工作，合理地期望知道的事情。该措辞用于表示组织不能为了避免披露要求而故意将个人的专利或专利申请蒙在鼓里。但这一要求不应被解释为要求IETF贡献者或参与者（或其代表的组织，如有）进行专利搜索以找到适用的知识产权。
o. "RFC": the basic publication series for the IETF. RFCs are published by the RFC Editor. (See Section 2.1 of [RFC2026].)
o. “RFC”：IETF的基本出版物系列。RFC由RFC编辑器发布。（见[RFC2026]第2.1节）
The IETF policies about Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), such as patent rights, relative to technologies developed in the IETF are designed to ensure that IETF working groups and Participants have as much information as possible about any IPR constraints on a technical proposal as early as possible in the development process. The policies are intended to benefit the Internet community and the public at large, while respecting the legitimate rights of IPR holders. This document details the IETF policies concerning IPR related to technology worked on within the IETF. It also describes
IETF与IETF中开发的技术相关的知识产权（IPR）政策（如专利权）旨在确保IETF工作组和参与者在开发过程中尽早获得关于技术提案的任何知识产权限制的尽可能多的信息。这些政策旨在使互联网社区和广大公众受益，同时尊重知识产权持有人的合法权利。本文件详细说明了IETF关于与IETF内工作的技术相关的知识产权的政策。它还描述了
the objectives that the policies are designed to meet. This document updates RFC 2026 and, with RFC 5378, replaces Section 10 of RFC 2026. This document also obsoletes RFC 3979 and RFC 4879.
政策旨在实现的目标。本文件更新了RFC 2026，并用RFC 5378取代了RFC 2026第10节。本文件还淘汰了RFC 3979和RFC 4879。
There are three basic principles regarding how the IETF deals with claims of Intellectual Property Rights (originally outlined in Section 10 of [RFC2026]):
关于IETF如何处理知识产权索赔，有三个基本原则（最初在[RFC2026]第10节中概述）：
(a) The IETF will make no determination about the validity of any particular IPR claim.
(a) IETF不会对任何特定知识产权索赔的有效性做出任何决定。
(b) The IETF, following normal processes, can decide to use technology for which IPR disclosures have been made if it decides that such a use is warranted.
(b) IETF在遵循正常流程的情况下，可以决定使用已披露知识产权的技术，前提是IETF认为这种使用是合理的。
(c) In order for a working group and the rest of the IETF to have the information needed to make an informed decision about the use of a particular technology, all those contributing to the working group's discussions must disclose the existence of any IPR the Contributor or any other IETF Participant believes Covers or may ultimately Cover the technology under discussion. This applies to both Contributors and other Participants, and applies whether they contribute in person, via email, or by other means. The requirement applies to all IPR of the Participant, the Participant's employer, sponsor, or others represented by the Participant that are reasonably and personally known to the Participant. No patent search is required.
(c) 为了使一个工作组和IETF的其他成员获得必要的信息，以便就特定技术的使用做出明智的决定，所有参与工作组讨论的人员必须披露其或任何其他IETF参与者认为涵盖或可能最终涵盖所讨论技术的任何知识产权的存在。这适用于贡献者和其他参与者，也适用于他们是否亲自、通过电子邮件或其他方式贡献。该要求适用于参与者、参与者的雇主、赞助人或参与者所代表的参与者合理且亲自知晓的其他人的所有知识产权。不需要进行专利检索。
Section 1 defines the terms used in this document. Sections 3 through 11 set forth the IETF's policies and procedures relating to IPR. Section 13 lists the changes between this document and RFCs 3979 and 4879. A separate document [RFC5378] deals with rights (such as copyrights and trademarks) in Contributions, including the right of the IETF and IETF Participants to publish and create derivative works of those Contributions. This document is not intended to address those issues. See RFC 6702 [RFC6702] for a discussion of "Promoting Compliance with Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Disclosure Rules".
第1节定义了本文件中使用的术语。第3节至第11节规定了IETF有关知识产权的政策和程序。第13节列出了本文件与RFCs 3979和4879之间的变更。另一份文件[RFC5378]涉及稿件中的权利（如版权和商标），包括IETF和IETF参与者发布和创建这些稿件衍生作品的权利。本文件无意解决这些问题。有关“促进遵守知识产权（IPR）披露规则”的讨论，请参见RFC 6702[RFC6702]。
This document is not intended as legal advice. Readers are advised to consult their own legal advisors if they would like a legal interpretation of their rights or the rights of the IETF in any Contributions they make.
本文件不作为法律意见。建议读者咨询自己的法律顾问，如果他们希望对自己的权利或IETF在其所做贡献中的权利进行法律解释。
In all matters relating to Intellectual Property Rights, the intent is to benefit the Internet community and the public at large, while respecting the legitimate rights of others. The disclosures required by this policy are intended to help IETF working groups define superior technical solutions with the benefit of as much information as reasonably possible about potential IPR claims relating to technologies under consideration.
在与知识产权有关的所有事项中，目的是使互联网社区和广大公众受益，同时尊重他人的合法权利。本政策要求的披露旨在帮助IETF工作组定义更好的技术解决方案，并尽可能合理地获取与所考虑技术相关的潜在知识产权索赔信息。
By submission of a Contribution, each person actually submitting the Contribution, and each named co-Contributor, is deemed to agree to the following terms and conditions on his or her own behalf and on behalf of the organizations the Contributor represents or is sponsored by (if any) when submitting the Contribution.
通过提交出资，实际提交出资的每个人和每个指定共同出资人在提交出资时被视为代表其本人和出资人所代表或赞助的组织（如有）同意以下条款和条件。
By Participating in the IETF, each Participant is deemed to agree to comply with all requirements of this RFC that relate to Participation in IETF activities. Without limiting the foregoing, each Participant that is a Contributor makes the following representations to the IETF:
通过参与IETF，每个参与者被视为同意遵守本RFC中与参与IETF活动有关的所有要求。在不限制上述规定的情况下，作为贡献者的每位参与者向IETF做出以下陈述：
A. Such Contributor represents that he or she has made or will promptly make all disclosures required by Section 5.1.1 of this document.
A.该出资人表示，他或她已经或将立即进行本文件第5.1.1节要求的所有披露。
B. Such Contributor represents that there are no limits to the Contributor's ability to make the grants, acknowledgments, and agreements herein that are reasonably and personally known to the Contributor.
B.该出资人表示，出资人在本协议中做出出资人合理且亲自知晓的授予、确认和协议的能力不受限制。
A. The IESG, IAB, ISOC, and IETF Trust disclaim any responsibility for identifying the existence of or for evaluating the applicability of any IPR, disclosed or otherwise, to any IETF technology, specification, or standard, and will take no position on the validity or scope of any such IPR.
A.IESG、IAB、ISOC和IETF信托机构不承担识别任何知识产权的存在或评估任何IETF技术、规范或标准的适用性的任何责任，也不对任何此类知识产权的有效性或范围采取任何立场。
B. When the IETF Secretariat has received a notification under Section 5.1.3 of the existence of non-participant IPR that potentially Covers a technology under discussion at IETF or which is the subject of an IETF Document, the IETF Secretariat shall promptly publish such notification and will request that the identified third party make an IPR disclosure in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.
B.当IETF秘书处收到根据第5.1.3节发出的关于存在可能涵盖IETF讨论中的技术或IETF文件主题的非参与者知识产权的通知时，IETF秘书处应立即发布此类通知，并要求确定的第三方按照第5节的规定进行知识产权披露。
C. When an IPR disclosure has been made as provided in Section 5 of this document, the IETF Secretariat may request from the purported holder of such IPR a written assurance that upon approval by the IESG for publication of the relevant IETF specification(s) as one or more RFCs, all persons will be able to obtain the right to implement, use, distribute, and exercise other rights with respect to Implementing Technology under one of the licensing options specified in Section 5.5.A below unless a statement identifying one of the licensing options described in Section 5.5.A has already been received by the IETF Secretariat. The working group proposing the use of the technology with respect to which the Intellectual Property Rights are disclosed may assist the IETF Secretariat in this effort.
C.当按照本文件第5节的规定进行了知识产权披露时，IETF秘书处可要求声称的知识产权持有人提供书面保证，在IESG批准将相关IETF规范作为一个或多个RFC发布后，所有人都将能够获得实施、使用、，除非IETF秘书处已收到第5.5.A节所述许可选项之一的声明，否则根据下文第5.5.A节规定的许可选项之一分发和行使与实施技术相关的其他权利。建议使用披露知识产权的技术的工作组可协助IETF秘书处开展这项工作。
The results of this procedure shall not, in themselves, block publication of an IETF Document or advancement of an IETF Document along the Standards Track. A working group may take into consideration the results of this procedure in evaluating the technology, and the IESG may defer approval when a delay may facilitate obtaining such assurances. The results will, however, be recorded by the IETF Secretariat and be made available online.
本程序的结果本身不得阻止IETF文件的发布或IETF文件在标准轨道上的推进。工作组可在评估技术时考虑该程序的结果，当延迟可能有助于获得此类保证时，IESG可推迟批准。然而，结果将由IETF秘书处记录并在线提供。
D. The IESG will not make any determination that any terms for the use of an Implementing Technology (e.g., the assurance of reasonable and non-discriminatory terms) have been fulfilled in practice. It will instead apply the normal requirements for the advancement of Internet Standards (see RFC 6410). If the two unrelated implementations of the specification that are required to advance from Proposed Standard to Internet Standard have been produced by different organizations or individuals, or if the "significant implementation and successful operational experience" required to advance from Proposed Standard to Internet Standard has been achieved, the IESG will presume that the terms are reasonable and to some degree non-discriminatory. Note that this also applies to the case where multiple implementers have concluded that no licensing is required.
D.IESG不会确定实施技术的任何使用条款（例如，合理和非歧视性条款的保证）已在实践中得到满足。相反，它将应用互联网标准发展的正常要求（见RFC 6410）。如果规范的两个不相关的实施是由不同的组织或个人制定的，需要从提议的标准发展到互联网标准，或者如果“重要的实施和成功的操作经验”IESG将假定这些条款是合理的，并且在一定程度上是非歧视性的，因此需要从提议的标准提升到互联网标准。注意，这也适用于多个实现者认为不需要许可的情况。
This presumption may be challenged at any time, including during the Last Call period by sending email to the IESG.
这一假设可能会在任何时候受到质疑，包括在最后一次通话期间，通过向IESG发送电子邮件。
This document refers to the IETF Participant making disclosures, consistent with the general IETF philosophy that Participants in the IETF act as individuals. A Participant's obligation to make a disclosure is also considered satisfied if the IPR owner, which may be the Participant's employer or sponsor, makes an appropriate disclosure in place of the Participant doing so.
本文件是指IETF参与者进行披露，符合IETF的一般理念，即IETF参与者作为个人行事。如果知识产权所有人（可能是参与者的雇主或赞助人）进行了适当的披露以代替参与者进行披露，则参与者进行披露的义务也被视为已履行。
Any Contributor who reasonably and personally knows of IPR meeting the conditions of Section 5.6 which the Contributor believes Covers or may ultimately Cover his or her written Contribution that is intended to be used as an input into the IETF Standards Process, or which the Contributor reasonably and personally knows his or her employer or sponsor may assert against Implementing Technologies based on such written Contribution, must make a disclosure in accordance with Section 5.
任何投稿人合理且亲自知道IPR符合第5.6节的条件，投稿人认为该条件涵盖或可能最终涵盖其书面投稿，该投稿人拟将其作为IETF标准过程的输入，或者出资人合理且亲自知道其雇主或赞助人可能会根据该书面出资主张反对实施技术的，必须根据第5节进行披露。
If an individual's Participation relates to a written Contribution made by somebody else that is intended to be used as an input into the IETF Standards Process, and such Participant reasonably and personally knows of IPR meeting the conditions of Section 5.6 which the Participant believes Covers or may ultimately Cover that Contribution, or which the Participant reasonably and personally knows his or her employer or sponsor may assert against Implementing Technologies based on such written Contribution, then such Participant must make a disclosure in accordance with Section 5.
如果个人参与与其他人的书面贡献有关，该书面贡献将被用作IETF标准过程的输入，且该参与者合理且亲自知道知识产权符合第5.6节的条件，且该参与者认为该贡献涵盖或可能最终涵盖该贡献，或者参与者合理且亲自知道其雇主或赞助人可能会根据此类书面贡献对实施技术提出异议，则该参与者必须根据第5节进行披露。
If any person has information about IPR that may Cover a technology relevant to the IETF Standards Process, but such person is not required to disclose such IPR under Sections 5.1.1 or 5.1.2 above, such person is nevertheless encouraged to file an IPR disclosure as described in Section 5.3 below. Such an IPR disclosure should be filed as soon as reasonably possible after the person realizes that such IPR may Cover a Contribution. Situations in which such voluntary IPR disclosures may be made include when (a) IPR does not meet the criteria in Section 5.6 because it is not owned or controlled by an IETF Participant or his or her sponsor or employer (referred to as third party IPR), (b) an individual is not required to disclose IPR meeting the requirements of Section 5.6 because that
如果任何人拥有可能涉及IETF标准过程相关技术的知识产权信息，但根据上述第5.1.1节或第5.1.2节，该人无需披露此类知识产权，则鼓励该人按照下文第5.3节的规定提交知识产权披露。此类知识产权披露应在相关人员意识到此类知识产权可能涵盖出资后尽快提交。可进行此类自愿知识产权披露的情况包括：（a）知识产权不符合第5.6节中的标准，因为它不是由IETF参与者或其赞助商或雇主拥有或控制的（称为第三方知识产权），（b）个人无需披露符合第5.6节要求的知识产权，因为
individual is not Participating in the relevant IETF activity, or (c) the IPR Covers technology that does not yet meet the criteria for a Contribution hereunder (e.g., it is disclosed in an informal or other non-IETF setting).
个人未参与相关IETF活动，或（c）IPR涵盖的技术尚未满足本协议下的贡献标准（例如，在非正式或其他非IETF环境中披露）。
Timely IPR disclosure is important because working groups need to have as much information as they can while they are evaluating alternative solutions.
及时披露知识产权非常重要，因为工作组在评估替代解决方案时需要尽可能多的信息。
A. The IPR disclosure required pursuant to Section 5.1.1 must be made as soon as reasonably possible after the Contribution is submitted or made unless the required disclosure is already on file. See Section 5.4.2 for a discussion of when updates need to be made for an existing disclosure.
A.根据第5.1.1节要求的知识产权披露必须在提交或作出贡献后尽快进行，除非要求的披露已经存档。有关何时需要对现有披露进行更新的讨论，请参见第5.4.2节。
B. If a Contributor first learns of IPR in its Contribution that meets the conditions of Section 5.6, for example a new patent application or the discovery of a relevant patent in a patent portfolio, after the Contribution is published in an Internet-Draft, a disclosure must be made as soon as reasonably possible after the IPR becomes reasonably and personally known to the Contributor.
B.如果贡献者在其贡献中首先了解到知识产权，且该贡献符合第5.6节的条件，例如新的专利申请或在专利组合中发现相关专利，则该贡献在互联网草稿中发布后，在出资人合理且亲自了解知识产权后，必须尽快进行披露。
The IPR disclosure required pursuant to Section 5.1.2 must be made as soon as reasonably possible after the Contribution is made, unless the required disclosure is already on file.
根据第5.1.2节要求的知识产权披露必须在出资后尽快进行，除非要求的披露已经存档。
Participants who realize that IPR meeting the conditions of Section 5.6 may Cover technology that will be or has been incorporated into a Contribution, or is seriously being discussed in a working group, are strongly encouraged to make a preliminary IPR disclosure. That IPR disclosure should be made as soon after coming to the realization as reasonably possible, not waiting until the Contribution is actually made.
强烈鼓励认识到符合第5.6节条件的知识产权可能涵盖将或已纳入贡献或正在工作组认真讨论的技术的参与者进行初步知识产权披露。知识产权披露应在实现后尽快进行，而不是等到实际做出贡献。
If an IETF Participant first learns of IPR that meets the conditions of Section 5.6 that may Cover a Contribution by another party, for example a new patent application or the discovery of a relevant patent in a patent portfolio, after the Contribution is made, an IPR disclosure must be made as soon as reasonably possible after the Contribution or IPR becomes reasonably and personally known to the Participant.
如果IETF参与者在作出贡献后，首先了解到知识产权符合第5.6节的条件，可能涵盖另一方的贡献，例如新专利申请或专利组合中相关专利的发现，在参与者合理且亲自了解出资或知识产权后，必须尽快进行知识产权披露。
By the nature of their office, IETF Area Directors or persons assisting them may become aware of Contributions late in the process (for example at IETF Last Call or during IESG review) and, therefore in such cases, cannot reasonably be expected to disclose IPR Covering those Contributions until they become aware of them.
根据其办公室的性质，IETF区域总监或协助他们的人员可能会在流程的后期（例如在IETF最后一次电话会议或IESG审查期间）意识到贡献，因此，在这种情况下，在他们意识到贡献之前，无法合理预期披露涵盖这些贡献的知识产权。
IPR disclosures must be made by following the instructions at <https://www.ietf.org/ipr-instructions>. IPR disclosures and other IPR-related information, including licensing information, must not be included in RFCs or other IETF Contributions. The RFC Editor will remove any IPR-related information from Contributions prior to publication as an RFC.
必须按照以下说明进行知识产权披露：<https://www.ietf.org/ipr-instructions>. 知识产权披露和其他知识产权相关信息，包括许可信息，不得包含在RFC或其他IETF贡献中。在以RFC形式发布之前，RFC编辑器将从稿件中删除任何与知识产权相关的信息。
An IPR disclosure must include the following information to the extent reasonably available to the discloser: (a) the numbers of any issued patents or published patent applications (or indicate that the disclosure is based on unpublished patent applications), (b) the name(s) of the inventor(s) (with respect to issued patents and published patent applications), (c) the specific IETF Document(s) or activity affected, and (d) if the IETF Document is an Internet-Draft, its specific version number. In addition, if it is not reasonably apparent which part of an IETF Document is allegedly Covered by disclosed IPR, then it is helpful if the discloser identifies the sections of the IETF Document that are allegedly Covered by such disclosed IPR.
知识产权披露必须包括披露方合理可用的以下信息：（a）任何已发布专利或已发布专利申请的数量（或表明披露基于未发布专利申请），（b）发明人的姓名（关于已发布的专利和已发布的专利申请），（c）受影响的特定IETF文件或活动，以及（d）如果IETF文件是一份互联网草案，其具体版本号。此外，如果不能合理地确定IETF文件的哪个部分被披露的知识产权覆盖，那么披露方确定IETF文件中被披露的知识产权覆盖的部分是有帮助的。
Those who disclose IPR should be aware that as Internet-Drafts evolve, text may be added or removed, and it is recommended that they keep this in mind when composing text for disclosures.
披露知识产权的人应意识到，随着互联网草案的发展，文本可能会被添加或删除，建议他们在撰写披露文本时牢记这一点。
A. Unless sufficient information to identify the issued patent was disclosed when the patent application was disclosed, an IPR disclosure must be updated or a new disclosure made promptly after any of the following has occurred: (1) the publication of a previously unpublished patent application, (2) the abandonment of a patent application, (3) the issuance of a patent on a previously disclosed patent application, or (4) a material change to the IETF Document covered by the Disclosure that causes the Disclosure to
A.除非在专利申请被披露时披露了足以识别已发布专利的充分信息，否则在发生以下任何一种情况后，必须及时更新知识产权披露或进行新的披露：（1）发布先前未发布的专利申请，（2）放弃专利申请，（3）对先前披露的专利申请发布专利，或（4）对披露所涵盖的IETF文件进行重大更改，从而导致披露失败
be covered by additional IPR. If the patent application was abandoned, then the new IPR disclosure must explicitly withdraw any earlier IPR disclosures based on the application. IPR disclosures against a particular Contribution are assumed to be inherited by revisions of the Contribution and by any RFCs that are published from the Contribution unless the disclosure has been updated or withdrawn.
受附加知识产权保护。如果专利申请被放弃，则新的知识产权披露必须明确撤回基于该申请的任何早期知识产权披露。针对特定贡献的知识产权披露假定由贡献的修订版和从贡献中发布的任何RFC继承，除非披露已更新或撤销。
B. If an IPR holder files patent applications in additional countries which refer to, and the claims of which are substantially identical to, the claims of a patent or patent application previously disclosed in an IPR disclosure, the IPR holder is not required to make a new or updated IPR disclosure as a result of filing such applications or the issuance of patents on such applications.
B.如果知识产权持有人在其他国家提交专利申请，这些国家的专利申请引用了先前在知识产权披露中披露的专利或专利申请的权利要求，且其权利要求基本相同，知识产权持有人无需因提交此类申请或发布此类申请的专利而进行新的或更新的知识产权披露。
C. New or revised IPR disclosures may be made voluntarily at any other time, provided that licensing information may only be updated in accordance with Section 5.5.C.
C.新的或修订的知识产权披露可在任何其他时间自愿进行，前提是许可信息只能根据第5.5.C节进行更新。
D. Any person may submit an update to an existing IPR disclosure. If such update is submitted by a person other than the submitter of the original IPR disclosure (as identified by name and email address), then the IETF Secretariat shall attempt to contact the original submitter to verify the update. If the original submitter responds that the proposed update is valid, the Secretariat will update the IPR disclosure accordingly. If the original submitter responds that the proposed update is not valid, the IETF Secretariat will not update the IPR disclosure. If the original submitter fails to respond after the IETF Secretariat has made three separate inquiries and at least 30 days have elapsed since the initial inquiry was made, then the IETF Secretariat will inform the submitter of the proposed update that the update was not validated and that the updater must produce legally sufficient evidence that the submitter (or his/her employer) owns or has the legal right to exercise control over the IPR subject to the IPR disclosure. If such evidence is satisfactory to the IETF Secretariat, after consultation with the IETF legal counsel, then the IETF Secretariat will make the requested update. If such evidence is not satisfactory, then the IETF Secretariat will not make the requested update.
D.任何人均可提交现有知识产权披露的更新。如果此类更新由原始知识产权披露提交人以外的人提交（通过姓名和电子邮件地址确定），则IETF秘书处应尝试联系原始提交人以验证更新。如果原始提交人回复建议的更新有效，秘书处将相应更新知识产权披露。如果原始提交人回复建议的更新无效，IETF秘书处将不会更新知识产权披露。如果原始提交人在IETF秘书处进行了三次单独的调查后，且自初始调查开始后至少30天未作出回应，然后，IETF秘书处将通知提议更新的提交人，该更新未经验证，且更新人必须提供足够的法律证据，证明提交人（或其雇主）拥有或有权根据知识产权披露对知识产权行使控制权。如果IETF秘书处在与IETF法律顾问协商后对此类证据感到满意，则IETF秘书处将进行要求的更新。如果此类证据不令人满意，IETF秘书处将不会进行所要求的更新。
The requirement to make an IPR disclosure is not satisfied by the submission of a blanket statement that IPR may exist on every Contribution or a general category of Contributions. This is the case because the aim of the disclosure requirement is to provide
提交一份全面声明，说明每一份贡献或一个一般类别的贡献中可能存在知识产权，不符合披露知识产权的要求。这是因为披露要求的目的是提供
information about specific IPR against specific technology under discussion in the IETF. The requirement is also not satisfied by a blanket statement of willingness or commitment to license all potential IPR Covering such technology under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms for the same reason. However, the requirement for an IPR disclosure is satisfied by a blanket statement of the IPR discloser's commitment to license all of its IPR meeting the requirements of Section 5.6 (and either Section 5.1.1 or 5.1.2) to implementers of an IETF specification on a royalty-free (and otherwise reasonable and non-discriminatory) basis as long as any other terms and conditions are disclosed in the IPR disclosure.
IETF中讨论的特定技术的特定知识产权信息。出于同样的原因，在公平、合理和非歧视性的条件下，一份愿意或承诺许可所有涵盖此类技术的潜在知识产权的全面声明也不能满足这一要求。但是，知识产权披露方承诺以免版税（以及其他合理和非歧视）的方式向IETF规范的实施者许可其所有符合第5.6节（以及第5.1.1或5.1.2节）要求的知识产权，从而满足知识产权披露的要求只要在知识产权披露中披露了任何其他条款和条件，则视情况而定。
A. Since IPR disclosures will be used by IETF working groups during their evaluation of alternative technical solutions, it is helpful if an IPR disclosure includes information about licensing of the IPR in case Implementing Technologies require a license. Specifically, it is helpful to indicate whether, upon approval by the IESG for publication as an RFC of the relevant IETF specification(s), all persons will be able to obtain the right to implement, use, distribute, and exercise other rights with respect to an Implementing Technology a) under a royalty-free and otherwise reasonable and non-discriminatory license, or b) under a license that contains reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions, including a reasonable royalty or other payment, or c) without the need to obtain a license from the IPR holder (e.g., a covenant not to sue with or without defensive suspension, as described in Section 7).
A.由于IETF工作组在评估替代技术解决方案时将使用知识产权披露，因此，如果知识产权披露包括在实施技术需要许可证的情况下的知识产权许可信息，则会有所帮助。具体而言，在IESG批准作为相关IETF规范的RFC发布后，指出是否所有人都能够获得实施、使用、分发、，并行使与实施技术相关的其他权利a）根据免版税和其他合理的非歧视性许可，或b）根据包含合理的非歧视性条款和条件的许可，包括合理的版税或其他付款，或c）无需从知识产权持有人处获得许可证（如第7节所述，在有或无辩护中止的情况下不起诉的约定）。
B. The inclusion of a licensing declaration is not mandatory, but it is encouraged so that the working groups will have as much information as they can during their deliberations. If the inclusion of a licensing declaration in an IPR disclosure would significantly delay its submission, then the discloser may submit an IPR disclosure without a licensing declaration and then submit a new IPR disclosure when the licensing declaration becomes available. IPR disclosures that voluntarily provide text that includes licensing information, comments, notes, or URLs for other information may also voluntarily include details regarding specific licensing terms that the IPR holder intends to offer to implementers of Implementing Technologies, including maximum royalties.
B.列入许可证声明不是强制性的，但鼓励列入许可证声明，以便工作组在审议期间能够获得尽可能多的信息。如果在知识产权披露中包含许可声明会显著延迟其提交，则披露方可以在没有许可声明的情况下提交知识产权披露，然后在许可声明可用时提交新的知识产权披露。自愿提供包含许可信息、评论、注释或其他信息URL的文本的知识产权披露也可能自愿包括知识产权持有人打算向实施技术的实施者提供的具体许可条款的详细信息，包括最高版税。
C. It is likely that IETF will rely on licensing declarations and other information that may be contained in an IPR disclosure and that implementers will make technical, legal, and commercial decisions on the basis of such commitments and information. Thus,
C.IETF很可能依赖许可声明和知识产权披露中可能包含的其他信息，实施者将根据这些承诺和信息做出技术、法律和商业决策。因此
when licensing declarations and other information, comments, notes, or URLs for further information are contained in an IPR disclosure, the persons making such disclosure agree and acknowledge that the commitments and information contained in such disclosure shall be irrevocable and will attach, to the extent permissible by law, to the associated IPR, and all implementers of Implementing Technologies will be justified and entitled to rely on such materials in relating to such IPR, whether or not such IPR is subsequently transferred to a third party by the IPR holder making the commitment or providing the information. IPR holders making IPR disclosures that contain licensing declarations or providing such information, comments, notes, or URLs for further information must ensure that such commitments are binding on any transferee of the relevant IPR, and that such transferee will use reasonable efforts to ensure that such commitments are binding on a subsequent transferee of the relevant IPR, and so on.
当许可声明和其他信息、评论、注释或进一步信息的URL包含在知识产权披露中时，进行此类披露的人员同意并承认此类披露中包含的承诺和信息是不可撤销的，并将在法律允许的范围内附上，对于相关知识产权，所有实施技术的实施者将有理由并有权依赖与该等知识产权相关的材料，无论该等知识产权随后是否由作出承诺或提供信息的知识产权持有人转让给第三方。进行包含许可声明的知识产权披露或提供此类信息、评论、注释或URL以获取进一步信息的知识产权持有人必须确保此类承诺对相关知识产权的任何受让人具有约束力，该受让人将尽合理努力确保该等承诺对相关知识产权的后续受让人具有约束力，等等。
D. Licensing declarations must be made by people who are authorized to make such declarations as discussed in Section 5.6 of this document.
D.许可声明必须由有权作出本文件第5.6节所述声明的人员作出。
IPR disclosures under Sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 are required with respect to IPR (a) that is owned, directly or indirectly, by the individual Contributor or his/her employer or sponsor (if any), or (b) that such persons otherwise have the right to license or assert, or (c) from which such persons derive a direct or indirect pecuniary benefit, or (d) as to which an individual Contributor is listed as an inventor on the relevant patent or patent application.
第5.1.1节和第5.1.2节规定的知识产权披露涉及（a）个人出资人或其雇主或赞助人（如有）直接或间接拥有的知识产权，或（b）此类人员有权许可或主张，或（c）此类人员从中获得直接或间接金钱利益，或（d）在相关专利或专利申请中，哪些个人贡献者被列为发明人。
If a Contribution is oral and is not followed promptly by a written disclosure of the same material, and if such oral Contribution would be subject to a requirement that an IPR Disclosure be made (had such oral Contribution been written), then the Contributor must accompany such oral Contribution with an oral declaration that he/she is aware of relevant IPR in as much detail as reasonably possible or file an IPR Declaration with respect to such oral Contribution that otherwise complies with the provisions of Sections 5.1 to 5.6 above.
如果一份贡献是口头的，并且没有立即以书面形式披露相同的材料，并且如果该口头贡献将受到知识产权披露要求的约束（如果该口头贡献是书面的），然后，出资人必须在口头出资的同时附上一份口头声明，说明他/她尽可能详细地了解相关的知识产权，或者提交一份与口头出资相关的知识产权声明，该口头出资符合上述第5.1节至第5.6节的规定。
As described in Section 5.3, the IETF will make available a public facility (e.g., a web page and associated database) for the posting of IPR disclosures conforming with the disclosure requirements of this policy. In addition, the IETF may make available a public
如第5.3节所述，IETF将提供公共设施（如网页和相关数据库），用于发布符合本政策披露要求的知识产权披露。此外，IETF还可以提供一个公共文件
facility for the posting of other IPR-related information and disclosures that do not satisfy the requirements of this policy but which may otherwise be informative and relevant to the IETF ("General Disclosures"). Such General Disclosures may include, among other things, "blanket disclosures" that do not contain a royalty-free licensing commitment as described in Section 5.4.3, disclosures of IPR that do not identify the specific IETF Documents Covered by the disclosed IPR, and licensing statements or commitments that are applicable generally and not to specific IPR disclosures. All of this information may be helpful to the IETF community, and its disclosure is encouraged. However, General Disclosures do not satisfy an IETF Participant's obligation to make IPR disclosures as required by this policy.
用于发布不符合本政策要求但可能具有信息性且与IETF相关的其他知识产权相关信息和披露的设施（“一般披露”）。此类一般披露可能包括，除其他事项外，不包含第5.4.3节所述免版税许可承诺的“一揽子披露”，不确定所披露知识产权涵盖的特定IETF文件的知识产权披露，以及适用于一般情况而非特定知识产权披露的许可声明或承诺。所有这些信息都可能对IETF社区有所帮助，鼓励其公开。但是，一般披露不符合IETF参与者按照本政策要求进行知识产权披露的义务。
In some cases, if an IPR disclosure submitted by an IETF Participant does not meet the requirements of this policy, the IETF may elect to post the non-conforming IPR disclosure as a General Disclosure in order to provide the greatest amount of information to the IETF community. This action does not excuse the IETF Participant from submitting a new IPR disclosure that conforms with the requirements of Sections 5.1 to 5.6. The IETF reserves the right to decline to publish General Disclosures that are not relevant to IETF activities, that are, or are suspected of being, defamatory, false, misleading, in violation of privacy or other applicable laws or regulations, or that are in a format that is not suitable for posting on the IETF facility that has been designated for General Disclosures.
在某些情况下，如果IETF参与者提交的知识产权披露不符合本政策的要求，IETF可选择将不符合要求的知识产权披露作为一般披露发布，以便向IETF社区提供最大数量的信息。该行动并不免除IETF参与者提交符合第5.1节至第5.6节要求的新知识产权披露的责任。IETF保留拒绝发布与IETF活动无关的、或涉嫌诽谤、虚假、误导、违反隐私或其他适用法律或法规的一般披露的权利，或其格式不适合发布在IETF设施上，该设施已被指定用于一般披露。
There may be cases in which individuals are not permitted by their employers or by other factors to disclose the existence or substance of patent applications or other IPR. Since disclosure is required for anyone making a Contribution or Participating in IETF activities, a person who is not willing or able to disclose IPR for this reason, or any other reason, must not contribute to or participate in IETF activities with respect to technologies that he or she reasonably and personally knows may be Covered by IPR which he or she will not disclose, unless that person knows that his or her employer or sponsor will make the required disclosures on his or her behalf.
在某些情况下，雇主或其他因素可能不允许个人披露专利申请或其他知识产权的存在或实质内容。由于任何做出贡献或参与IETF活动的人都需要披露，因此不愿意或不能披露知识产权的人，或任何其他原因，不得对IETF活动作出贡献或参与IETF活动，除非该人员知道其雇主或赞助人将代表他或她进行所需的披露，否则他或她本人合理地知道该技术可能属于知识产权范围，但他或她不会披露。
Contributing to or Participating in IETF activities about a technology without making required IPR disclosures is a violation of IETF policy.
在未进行必要的知识产权披露的情况下参与或参与IETF关于某项技术的活动是违反IETF政策的。
In addition to any remedies or defenses that may be available to implementers and others under the law with respect to such a violation (e.g., rendering the relevant IPR unenforceable), sanctions are available through the normal IETF processes for handling
除了法律规定的实施者和其他人可获得的任何补救措施或抗辩外（例如，使相关知识产权无法执行），还可通过正常的IETF流程进行处理
disruptions to IETF work. See [RFC6701] for details regarding the sanctions defined in various existing Best Current Practice documents.
IETF工作中断。参见[RFC6701]了解各种现有最佳实践文件中定义的制裁的详细信息。
In general, IETF working groups prefer technologies with no known IPR claims or, for technologies with claims against them, an offer of royalty-free licensing. However, to solve a given technical problem, IETF working groups have the discretion to adopt a technology as to which IPR claims have been made if they feel that this technology is superior enough to alternatives with fewer IPR claims or free licensing to outweigh the potential cost of the licenses. To assist these working groups, it is helpful for the IPR claimants to declare, in their IPR Declarations, the terms, if any, on which they are willing to license their IPR Covering the relevant IETF Documents.
一般来说，IETF工作组更喜欢没有已知知识产权声明的技术，或者，对于有针对性声明的技术，提供免版税许可。然而，为了解决给定的技术问题，IETF工作组有权自行决定采用一种技术，如果他们认为该技术优于知识产权声明较少或免费许可的替代技术，从而超过许可的潜在成本。为协助这些工作组，知识产权权利人在其知识产权声明中声明其愿意许可其知识产权的条款（如有），包括相关IETF文件，这是很有帮助的。
A. When adopting new technologies, the participants in an IETF working group are expected to evaluate all the relevant tradeoffs from their perspective. Most of the time these considerations are based purely on technical excellence, but IPR considerations may also affect the evaluation and specific licensing terms may affect the participants' opinion on the desirability of adopting a particular technology.
A.在采用新技术时，IETF工作组的参与者应从他们的角度评估所有相关权衡。大多数情况下，这些考虑纯粹基于技术卓越性，但知识产权考虑也可能影响评估，具体许可条款可能影响参与者对采用特定技术可取性的意见。
B. The IETF has no official preference among different licensing terms beyond what was stated at the beginning of this section. However, for information and to assist participants in understanding what license conditions may imply, what follows are some general observations about some common types of conditions. The following paragraphs are provided for information only:
B.除本节开头所述内容外，IETF在不同的许可条款中没有官方偏好。然而，为了提供信息并帮助参与者理解许可条件可能意味着什么，以下是一些关于一些常见条件类型的一般观察结果。以下段落仅供参考：
C. When there is no commitment to license patents covering the technology, this creates uncertainty that obviously is concerning. These concerns do not exist when there is a commitment to license, but the license terms can still differ greatly. Some common conditions include 1) terms that are fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory, and which may bear royalties or other financial obligations (FRAND or RAND); 2) royalty-free terms that are otherwise fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (RAND-z); and 3) commitments not to assert declared IPR, possibly conditional on reciprocity. Open source projects, for instance, often prefer the latter two. Note that licenses often come with complex terms that have to be evaluated in detail, and this crude classification may not be sufficient to make a proper evaluation. For instance, licenses may also include reciprocity and defensive suspension requirements that require careful evaluation.
C.当没有承诺许可涉及该技术的专利时，这就产生了明显令人担忧的不确定性。当有许可证承诺时，这些问题并不存在，但许可证条款仍可能存在很大差异。一些常见条件包括1）公平、合理、非歧视性的条款，可能承担版税或其他财务义务（FRAND或RAND）；2） 公平、合理和非歧视性的免版税条款（RAND-z）；3）不主张已申报知识产权的承诺，可能以互惠为条件。例如，开源项目通常更喜欢后两者。请注意，许可证通常带有复杂的术语，必须进行详细评估，这种粗略的分类可能不足以进行适当的评估。例如，许可证还可能包括互惠和防御性暂停要求，需要仔细评估。
D. The level of use of a technology against which IPR is disclosed is also an important factor in weighing IPR encumbrances and associated licensing conditions against technical merits. For example, if technologies are being considered for a mandatory-to-implement change to a widely deployed protocol, the hurdle should be very high for encumbered technologies, whereas a similar hurdle for a new protocol could conceivably be lower.
D.披露知识产权的技术的使用水平也是衡量知识产权产权负担和相关许可条件与技术价值的重要因素。例如，如果正在考虑将技术用于强制实施对广泛部署的协议的更改，那么对于受阻碍的技术来说，障碍应该非常高，而对于新协议来说，类似的障碍可能更低。
E. IETF working groups and IETF areas may, however, adopt stricter requirements in specific cases. For instance, the IETF Security Area has adopted stricter requirements for some security technologies. It has become common to have a mandatory-to-implement security technology in IETF technology specifications. This is to ensure that there will be at least one common security technology present in all implementations of such a specification that can be used in all cases. This does not limit the specification from including other security technologies, the use of which could be negotiated between implementations. An IETF consensus has developed that no mandatory-to-implement security technology can be specified in an IETF specification unless it has no known IPR claims against it or a royalty-free license is available to implementers of the specification. It is possible to specify such a technology in violation of this principle if there is a very good reason to do so and if that reason is documented and agreed to through IETF consensus. This limitation does not extend to other security technologies in the same specification if they are not listed as mandatory to implement.
E.然而，IETF工作组和IETF区域可在特定情况下采用更严格的要求。例如，IETF安全领域对某些安全技术采用了更严格的要求。在IETF技术规范中，强制实施安全技术已成为普遍现象。这是为了确保在此类规范的所有实现中至少存在一种通用安全技术，可以在所有情况下使用。这并不限制规范包括其他安全技术，这些技术的使用可以在实现之间协商。IETF的共识是，除非IETF规范的实施者没有已知的知识产权要求，或者该规范的实施者可以获得免版税的许可证，否则IETF规范中不能规定强制实施安全技术。如果有很好的理由这样做，并且通过IETF协商一致的方式记录并同意了该理由，则有可能违反该原则指定此类技术。如果同一规范中的其他安全技术未被列为强制实施，则此限制不扩展到这些技术。
F. It should also be noted that the absence of IPR disclosures at any given time is not the same thing as the knowledge that there will be no IPR disclosure in the future, or that no IPR Covers the relevant technology. People or organizations not currently involved in the IETF or people or organizations that discover IPR they feel to be relevant in their patent portfolios can make IPR disclosures at any time.
F.还应注意的是，在任何给定时间没有知识产权披露与知道未来不会有知识产权披露或知识产权不涵盖相关技术并不相同。目前未参与IETF的人员或组织，或发现他们认为与其专利组合相关的知识产权的人员或组织，可以随时披露知识产权。
G. It should be noted that the validity and enforceability of any IPR may be challenged for legitimate reasons outside the IETF. The mere existence of an IPR disclosure should not be taken to mean that the disclosed IPR is valid or enforceable or actually Covers a particular Contribution. Although the IETF can make no actual determination of validity, enforceability, or applicability of any particular IPR, it is reasonable that individuals in a working group or the IESG will take into account their own views of the validity, enforceability, or applicability of IPR in their evaluation of alternative technologies.
G.应注意的是，任何知识产权的有效性和可执行性可能会因IETF之外的合法原因受到质疑。仅仅存在知识产权披露不应被视为意味着所披露的知识产权是有效的或可执行的，或实际上涵盖了特定的贡献。尽管IETF无法实际确定任何特定知识产权的有效性、可执行性或适用性，但工作组或IESG中的个人在评估替代技术时将考虑其对知识产权的有效性、可执行性或适用性的观点是合理的。
The IETF must have change control over the technology described in any Standards Track IETF Documents in order to fix problems that may be discovered or to produce other derivative works.
IETF必须对任何标准跟踪IETF文件中描述的技术进行变更控制，以修复可能发现的问题或产生其他衍生作品。
In some cases, the developer of patented or otherwise controlled technology may decide to hand over to the IETF the right to evolve the technology (a.k.a., "change control"). The implementation of an agreement between the IETF and the developer of the technology can be complex. (See [RFC1790] and [RFC2339] for examples.)
在某些情况下，专利技术或其他受控技术的开发人员可能决定将技术发展权移交给IETF（也称为“变更控制”）。IETF和技术开发人员之间协议的实施可能很复杂。（有关示例，请参见[RFC1790]和[RFC2339]）
Note that there is no inherent prohibition against a Standards Track IETF Document making a normative reference to proprietary technology. For example, a number of IETF standards support proprietary cryptographic transforms.
请注意，标准跟踪IETF文件对专有技术的规范性引用没有固有的禁止。例如，许多IETF标准支持专有密码转换。
Section 2.2 of RFC 6410 [RFC6410] states:
RFC 6410[RFC6410]第2.2节规定：
If the technology required to implement the specification requires patented or otherwise controlled technology, then the set of implementations must demonstrate at least two independent, separate and successful uses of the licensing process.
如果实施本规范所需的技术需要专利技术或其他受控技术，则实施集必须证明至少两个独立、独立和成功地使用了许可过程。
A key word in this text is "requires". The mere existence of disclosed IPR does not necessarily mean that licenses are actually required in order to implement the technology.
本文中的一个关键词是“需要”。仅仅存在已披露的知识产权并不一定意味着实施该技术实际上需要许可证。
IETF Documents must not contain any mention of specific IPR. All specific IPR disclosures must be submitted as described in Section 5. Readers should always refer to the online web page <https://www.ietf.org/ipr/> to get a full list of IPR disclosures received by the IETF concerning any Contribution.
IETF文件不得提及特定的知识产权。所有特定的知识产权披露必须按照第5节所述提交。读者应始终参考在线网页<https://www.ietf.org/ipr/>获取IETF收到的与任何贡献有关的知识产权披露的完整列表。
This document has been developed for the benefit and use of the IETF community. As such, the rules set forth herein apply to all Contributions and IETF Documents that are in the "IETF Document Stream" as defined in Section 5.1.1 of [RFC4844] (i.e., those that are contributed, developed, edited, and published as part of the IETF Standards Process).
本文件是为IETF社区的利益和使用而编制的。因此，本文规定的规则适用于[RFC4844]第5.1.1节定义的“IETF文件流”中的所有贡献和IETF文件（即，作为IETF标准过程的一部分贡献、开发、编辑和发布的贡献和IETF文件）。
The rules that apply to documents in Alternate Streams are established by the managers of those Alternate Streams (currently the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG), and Independent Submission Editor, as specified in [RFC4844]). These managers may elect, through their own internal processes, to cause this document to be applied to documents contributed to them for development, editing, and publication in their respective Alternate Streams. If an Alternate Stream manager elects to adopt this document, they must do so in a manner that is public and notifies their respective document Contributors that this document applies to their respective Alternate Streams. In such case, each occurrence of the term "Contribution" and "IETF Document" in this document shall be read to mean a contribution or document in such Alternate Stream, as the case may be. It would be advisable for such Alternate Stream managers to consider adapting the definitions of "Contribution" and other provisions in this document to suit their particular needs.
适用于备用流中文件的规则由备用流的管理者（目前为互联网体系结构委员会（IAB）、互联网研究指导小组（IRSG）和独立提交编辑器，如[RFC4844]所述）制定。这些经理可以通过自己的内部流程，选择将本文件应用于向其提供的文件，以便在各自的备选流程中进行开发、编辑和发布。如果备用流管理器选择采用本文件，他们必须以公开的方式这样做，并通知其各自的文档贡献者本文件适用于其各自的备用流。在这种情况下，本文件中出现的术语“贡献”和“IETF文件”应视情况理解为该替代流中的贡献或文件。对于这样的备用流管理者，最好考虑修改“贡献”的定义和本文档中的其他规定，以满足他们的特殊需要。
This document relates to the IETF process, not any particular technology. There are security considerations when adopting any technology, whether IPR protected or not. A working group should take those security considerations into account as one part of evaluating the technology, just as IPR is one part, but there are no known issues of security with IPR procedures.
本文件涉及IETF过程，而非任何特定技术。无论是否受知识产权保护，在采用任何技术时都要考虑安全因素。工作组应将这些安全考虑因素作为评估技术的一部分加以考虑，正如知识产权是其中一部分，但知识产权程序不存在已知的安全问题。
The material in RFC 3979 was significantly reorganized to produce this document. This section reviews the actual changes in content since RFC 3979 and does not detail the reorganization. These changes are listed from the point of view of this document with reference to the RFC 3979 section where useful. This section is intended only as an informational summary of the text contained in Sections 1-12 of this document. This section does not constitute the official policy of the IETF and should not be referred to or quoted as such. Any discrepancies or ambiguities shall be resolved in favor of the language contained in Sections 1-12 of this document.
RFC 3979中的材料进行了重大重组，以编制本文件。本节回顾了自RFC 3979以来内容的实际变化，并没有详细说明重组。从本文件的角度出发，参考RFC 3979章节（如适用），列出了这些变更。本节仅作为本文件第1-12节所含文本的信息性摘要。本节不构成IETF的官方政策，因此不应提及或引用。任何差异或歧义应以本文件第1-12节所含语言为准予以解决。
Boilerplate - Since the document boilerplate formerly in Section 5 of RFC 3979 has been moved to the Trust Legal Provisions since 2009, the boilerplate requirements have been deleted from this document.
样板文件-自2009年起，RFC 3979第5节中的文件样板文件已移至信托法律条款，因此本文件中的样板文件要求已删除。
1 - Definitions
1-定义
1.a - "Alternate Stream" definition (new): Added to enable IRTF, IAB, and Independent Submission streams to adopt and use BCP 79 more easily.
1.a-“备用流”定义（新）：增加了该定义，以使IRTF、IAB和独立提交流能够更容易地采用和使用BCP 79。
1.c - "Contribution" (was 1.c)
1.c.“贡献”（was 1.c）
Removed "IETF" to more easily enable other Streams to adopt this policy.
删除“IETF”以更容易地使其他流采用此策略。
Added "intended to affect the IETF Standards Process", which is needed to prevent information presentations (e.g., plenary guest speakers) from being considered Contributions.
增加了“旨在影响IETF标准过程”，这是防止信息展示（如全体嘉宾演讲）被视为贡献所必需的。
Added BOF, design team, web site, and chat room. Contributions can be made in any of these places.
添加了BOF、设计团队、网站和聊天室。可以在这些地方中的任何一个作出贡献。
1.e - "Covers" (was 1.n) - Added "provisional patent application" - Required to eliminate ambiguity whether provisional applications are included.
1.e.“封面”（WAS1.n）-添加“临时专利申请”-要求消除临时申请是否包括在内的歧义。
1.h - "IETF Documents" (was 1.h) - Limited to IETF (not Alternate Stream) documents.
1.h-“IETF文件”（WAS1.h）-仅限于IETF（非备用流）文件。
1.i - "IETF Standards Process" (was 1.b) - Clarify that Contributions can be made in contexts other than traditional IETF standards development.
1.i-“IETF标准过程”（was 1.b）-阐明可以在传统IETF标准开发以外的环境中做出贡献。
1.j - "IPR" (was 1.o) - Removed reference to copyrights, database rights, and data rights. Copyright in IETF Documents and contributions is addressed under RFC 5378 and is treated very differently than patents, which are the focus of BCP 79. Data/database rights not relevant to IETF standards, and cannot be registered or disclosed in the manner of patents.
1.j-“知识产权”（WAS1.o）-删除了对版权、数据库权利和数据权利的引用。IETF文档和贡献中的版权在RFC 5378中进行了处理，处理方式与专利非常不同，专利是BCP 79的重点。数据/数据库权利与IETF标准无关，不能以专利方式注册或披露。
1.l - "Internet-Draft" (was 1.g) - Reduced to reference RFC 2026 without additional description for clarity.
1.l-“互联网草案”（was 1.g）-简化为参考RFC 2026，为清晰起见，无需额外说明。
1.m - "Participating in an IETF discussion or activity" (new) - Due to numerous ambiguities over the years, it was necessary to add a section describing what it means to "participate" in an IETF activity.
1.m-“参与IETF讨论或活动”（新增）-由于多年来存在许多歧义，有必要增加一节，说明“参与”IETF活动的含义。
1.o - "RFC" (was 1.e) - Added cross-reference to RFC 2026 and eliminated textual description of RFC permanence.
1.o-“RFC”（WAS1.e）-增加了对RFC 2026的交叉引用，并消除了RFC永久性的文本描述。
2 - Introduction - Added text that offers an overview of why we have this policy, cut prior discussion of Section 10 of RFC 2026 as no longer necessary, and added references to subsequent RFCs relating to IPR, including RFC 5378 and 6702.
2-导言-增加了文本，概述了我们制定本政策的原因，将之前对RFC 2026第10节的讨论删减为不再必要，并增加了对与知识产权相关的后续RFC的参考，包括RFC 5378和6702。
3 - Participation in the IETF (was "Contributions to the IETF") - Changed focus to participation rather than making of Contributions and explained why we require IPR disclosure.
3-参与IETF（即“对IETF的贡献”）-将重点改为参与，而不是做出贡献，并解释了为什么我们要求披露知识产权。
old 3.2.1.C - Deleted because all required legends in IETF Documents are now described in RFC 5378 and Trust Legal Provisions.
旧的3.2.1.C-删除，因为IETF文件中所有必需的图例现在都在RFC 5378和信托法律条款中描述。
3.3 - Obligations on Participants - Added to make clear that participation in IETF obligates the participant to comply with IETF rules.
3.3 -参与者的义务-增加以明确参与IETF使参与者有义务遵守IETF规则。
old 4.A - Removed because inconsistent with current and historical practice. Also, all legends in IETF Documents are now addressed in Trust Legal Provisions.
旧4.A-因与当前和历史实践不一致而删除。此外，IETF文件中的所有图例现在都在信托法律条款中处理。
4.A - "The IESG, IAB..." - Added IAB, ISOC, and IETF Trust to disclaimer.
4.A.“IESG、IAB…”在免责声明中增加了IAB、ISOC和IETF信托。
4.B - "When the IETF Secretariat..." - Added description of current procedure used to publish third party IPR disclosures.
4.B-“当IETF秘书处……”增加了用于公布第三方知识产权披露的当前程序的说明。
4.C - "When an IPR disclosure..." - Updated to reflect current practice and roles (e.g., Secretariat rather than IETF Exec Dir).
4.C-“知识产权披露时…”-更新以反映当前的实践和角色（例如，秘书处而非IETF执行董事）。
4.D - Determination of Provision of Reasonable and Non-discriminatory Terms (was Section 4.1) - Various edits made to this paragraph to reflect current process for advancement of standards.
4.D-确定合理和非歧视性条款的规定（was第4.1节）-对本段进行了各种编辑，以反映当前的标准推进过程。
old 5 - Deleted because it was not needed.
旧5-已删除，因为不需要它。
5.1.1 - Contributor's IPR in His or Her Contribution (was Section 6.1.1) - Limits disclosure obligation to written Contributions intended to be used as inputs to the IETF Standards Process. Oral disclosures are now covered in Section 5.7.
5.1.1 -贡献者在其贡献中的知识产权（was第6.1.1节）-将披露义务限制为拟用作IETF标准过程输入的书面贡献。口头披露现包含在第5.7节中。
5.1.2 - An IETF Participant's IPR in Contributions by Others (was Section 6.1.2) - Revisions made consistent with Section 5.1.1 above.
5.1.2 -IETF参与者在他人贡献中的知识产权（参见第6.1.2节）——根据上述第5.1.1节进行了修订。
5.1.3 - Voluntary IPR Disclosures (was Section 6.1.3) - Fixes procedures for making voluntary IPR disclosures and adds examples of when voluntary disclosures may be appropriate. In addition to IPR of others, voluntary disclosures are encouraged when an IETF Participant is aware of its own IPR that covers IETF work in which it is not an active participant and when the technology is disclosed in other than an IETF setting.
5.1.3 -自愿知识产权披露（was第6.1.3节）-确定了进行自愿知识产权披露的程序，并添加了自愿披露可能适用的示例。除其他人的知识产权外，当IETF参与者意识到其自身的知识产权涵盖其非积极参与者的IETF工作时，以及当该技术在IETF设置以外的环境中披露时，鼓励自愿披露。
5.2.1 - Timing of Disclosure under Section 5.1.1 (was Section 6.2.1) - Trigger for disclosure changed from publication of a Contribution in an I-D to "submitted or made"; lengthy example regarding updates deleted in lieu of cross-reference to Section 5.4.2 regarding updates.
5.2.1 -第5.1.1节（即第6.2.1节）规定的披露时间——披露触发因素从在I-D中公布出资变更为“提交或作出”；关于删除更新的冗长示例，以代替第5.4.2节关于更新的交叉参考。
5.2.2 - Timing of Disclosure under Section 5.1.2 (was Section 6.2.2) - Corresponding changes made per Section 5.2.1.
5.2.2 -第5.1.2节（原第6.2.2节）规定的披露时间-根据第5.2.1节做出的相应变更。
5.2.3 - Timing of Disclosure by ADs - Added to clarify AD disclosure obligations.
5.2.3 -ADs披露的时间安排-增加以澄清广告披露义务。
5.3 - "IPR disclosures and other..." - Reflects current practice regarding prohibition of including IPR information directly in IETF Documents.
5.3 -“知识产权披露和其他……”反映了禁止将知识产权信息直接包含在IETF文件中的现行做法。
5.4.1 - Content of IPR Disclosures (was Section 6.4.1) - Added requirement to disclose names of inventors - Disclosing the name(s) of inventors on a patent will make it more likely that IETF Participants will recognize whether the inventor is an IETF Participant and what IETF activities that individual participates in. This information is easy for the discloser to provide and less convenient for every reader of the IPR disclosure to look up in patent office records (if even available).
5.4.1 -知识产权披露的内容（was第6.4.1节）-增加了披露发明人姓名的要求-在专利上披露发明人姓名将使IETF参与者更有可能识别发明人是否为IETF参与者以及个人参与的IETF活动。披露方很容易提供这些信息，而知识产权披露的每一位读者在专利局记录（如果有的话）中查找这些信息也不太方便。
5.4.2 - Updating IPR Disclosures (was Section 6.4.2) - Significant revisions and additional detail added regarding updating of IPR disclosures upon events such as issuance of patents, amendment of claims, employee changing jobs, employer acquires another company, etc.
5.4.2 -更新知识产权披露（was第6.4.2节）-对知识产权披露进行了重大修订，并增加了更多细节，涉及在专利发布、索赔修改、员工更换工作、雇主收购另一家公司等事件时更新知识产权披露。
5.4.2.D - Clarify that additional IPR disclosures are not needed for foreign counterparts.
5.4.2.D-澄清外国同行不需要额外的知识产权披露。
5.4.3 - Blanket IPR Statements (was Section 6.4.3) - wording clarifications and changed "willingness" to "commitment". A blanket IPR disclosure which does not list specific patent numbers is not compliant with this policy unless the discloser commits (and is not just willing) to license such patents on royalty-free and otherwise reasonable terms.
5.4.3 -综合知识产权声明（was第6.4.3节）-措辞澄清，并将“意愿”改为“承诺”。未列出具体专利号的一揽子知识产权披露不符合本政策，除非披露方承诺（且不仅愿意）以免版税和其他合理条款许可此类专利。
5.5.C - "It is likely that IETF will rely ..." (new paragraph) - Makes licensing declarations irrevocable so that they may be relied upon in the future by implementers.
5.5.C.“IETF很可能会依赖……”（新段落）——使许可声明不可撤销，以便实施者将来可以依赖这些声明。
5.5.D - "Licensing declarations ..." (new paragraph) - Requires that licensing declarations must be made by people authorized to make them.
5.5.D.“许可声明…”（新的一段）-要求许可声明必须由有权声明的人员作出。
5.6 - Level of Control over IPR Requiring Disclosure (was Section 6.6) - In addition to ownership of IPR, language added to require disclosure when Participants derive a pecuniary benefit from the IPR, or the individual is a listed inventor - Clarifications to address situations not covered in earlier version.
5.6 -对需要披露的知识产权的控制水平（was第6.6节）-除了知识产权的所有权外，当参与者从知识产权中获得金钱利益或个人是上市发明人时，还增加了要求披露的语言-澄清以解决早期版本中未涵盖的情况。
5.7 - Disclosures for Oral Contributions (new): Describes procedure for oral Contributions. Previously, statements regarding oral statements were contradictory. Some places said that disclosures must be made for oral statements, but others talk about disclosures only being required following publication as an I-D. Under new text, oral statements don't trigger the normal IPR disclosure obligations, as oral statements are inherently imprecise and it's hard to know when they describe something covered by the technical terms of a patent claim. However, if an oral contribution is made and it is not followed by a written contribution, then the oral discloser must either make a concurrent oral IPR disclosure or file a formal written disclosure.
5.7 -口头贡献的披露（新）：描述口头贡献的程序。以前，关于口头陈述的陈述相互矛盾。一些地方表示，必须对口头声明进行披露，但其他地方则表示，只有在作为身份证发布后才需要披露。根据新文本，口头声明不会触发正常的知识产权披露义务，因为口头陈述本质上是不精确的，很难知道它们何时描述了专利权要求的技术术语所涵盖的内容。但是，如果作出口头贡献，但之后没有书面贡献，则口头披露方必须同时进行口头知识产权披露或提交正式书面披露。
5.8 - General Disclosures (new) - Describes the IETF's public disclosure feature, which allows IPR disclosures to be made by anyone, whether or not an IETF Participant. The feature has been up and running for years, and this language describes its current implementation.
5.8 -一般披露（新）-描述IETF的公开披露功能，允许任何人进行知识产权披露，无论是否IETF参与者。该特性已经启动并运行了多年，这种语言描述了它当前的实现。
6 - Failure to Disclose (was Section 7) - Technical and clarity corrections, as well as new language describing potential remedies for failures to disclose IPR in accordance with IETF rules, including IESG actions described in RFC 6701.
6-未能披露（was第7节）-技术和清晰度更正，以及描述未能根据IETF规则披露知识产权的潜在补救措施的新语言，包括RFC 6701中描述的IESG行动。
7 - Evaluating Alternative Technologies in IETF Working Groups (was Section 8).
7-评估IETF工作组中的替代技术（was第8节）。
Paragraph 1 - Minor wording changes for clarity.
第1款-为清晰起见，对措辞作了细微修改。
Paragraphs 2-5 (new) - Relate to the considerations made by IETF WGs when evaluating patent and licensing disclosures concerning IETF standards.
第2-5段（新增）-涉及IETF工作组在评估与IETF标准有关的专利和许可披露时所作的考虑。
Paragraph 6 - security technologies (new) - Makes clear that security is only one example of stricter requirements. Also requires that violation of requirements for royalty-free licensing in the security area can be made only with IETF consensus.
第6段-安全技术（新）-明确指出，安全只是更严格要求的一个例子。还要求只有在IETF协商一致的情况下，才能违反安全领域免版税许可的要求。
Paragraphs 7-8 (were paragraphs 3-4) - Wording changes for clarity.
第7-8段（原第3-4段）-为清晰起见，对措辞进行了修改。
9 - Licensing Requirements to Advance Standards Track IETF Documents (was Section 10) - Wording updated to reflect RFC 6410.
9-推进标准跟踪IETF文件的许可要求（was第10节）-更新措辞以反映RFC 6410。
10 - No IPR Disclosures in IETF Documents (was Section 11) - Wording simplified to refer to Section 5.
10-IETF文件中未披露知识产权（was第11节）-措辞简化为参考第5节。
11 - Application to Non-IETF Stream Documents (new) - Adds procedures to be followed by Alternate Stream (IAB, IRTF, Independent Submission) managers to adopt these rules and procedures. Borrowed and adapted the copyright language used in the Trust Legal Provisions. Each Alternate Stream (Independent Submission, IRTF, and IAB) would need to take some action (preferably issuing an RFC) to adopt BCP 79 for its stream. This was done with copyright already, and pretty smoothly.
11-非IETF流文件的应用（新）-增加了备用流（IAB、IRTF、独立提交）管理者采用这些规则和程序所需遵循的程序。借用并改编了信托法律条款中使用的版权语言。每个备选流（独立提交、IRTF和IAB）都需要采取一些措施（最好是发布RFC）以采用BCP 79作为其流。这已经在版权保护下完成了，而且相当顺利。
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2026>.
[RFC2026]Bradner，S.，“互联网标准过程——第3版”，BCP 9，RFC 2026，DOI 10.17487/RFC2026，1996年10月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2026>.
[RFC2028] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in the IETF Standards Process", BCP 11, RFC 2028, DOI 10.17487/RFC2028, October 1996, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2028>.
[RFC2028]Hovey，R.和S.Bradner，“参与IETF标准过程的组织”，BCP 11，RFC 2028，DOI 10.17487/RFC2028，1996年10月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2028>.
[RFC4844] Daigle, L., Ed., and Internet Architecture Board, "The RFC Series and RFC Editor", RFC 4844, DOI 10.17487/RFC4844, July 2007, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4844>.
[RFC4844]Daigle，L.，Ed.，和互联网架构委员会，“RFC系列和RFC编辑器”，RFC 4844，DOI 10.17487/RFC4844，2007年7月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4844>.
[RFC6410] Housley, R., Crocker, D., and E. Burger, "Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels", BCP 9, RFC 6410, DOI 10.17487/RFC6410, October 2011, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6410>.
[RFC6410]Housley，R.，Crocker，D.，和E.Burger，“将标准轨道降低到两个成熟度水平”，BCP 9，RFC 6410，DOI 10.17487/RFC6410，2011年10月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6410>.
[RFC1790] Cerf, V., "An Agreement between the Internet Society and Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the Matter of ONC RPC and XDR Protocols", RFC 1790, DOI 10.17487/RFC1790, April 1995, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1790>.
[RFC1790]Cerf，V.，“互联网协会与Sun Microsystems，Inc.就ONC RPC和XDR协议达成的协议”，RFC 1790，DOI 10.17487/RFC1790，1995年4月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1790>.
[RFC2339] The Internet Society and Sun Microsystems, "An Agreement Between the Internet Society, the IETF, and Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the matter of NFS V.4 Protocols", RFC 2339, DOI 10.17487/RFC2339, May 1998, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2339>.
[RFC2339]互联网协会和Sun Microsystems，“互联网协会、IETF和Sun Microsystems，Inc.之间关于NFS V.4协议的协议”，RFC 2339，DOI 10.17487/RFC2339，1998年5月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2339>.
[RFC5378] Bradner, S., Ed., and J. Contreras, Ed., "Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust", BCP 78, RFC 5378, DOI 10.17487/RFC5378, November 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5378>.
[RFC5378]Bradner，S.，Ed.，和J.Contreras，Ed.，“向IETF信托提供的权利贡献者”，BCP 78，RFC 5378，DOI 10.17487/RFC5378，2008年11月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5378>.
[RFC6701] Farrel, A. and P. Resnick, "Sanctions Available for Application to Violators of IETF IPR Policy", RFC 6701, DOI 10.17487/RFC6701, August 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6701>.
[RFC6701]Farrel，A.和P.Resnick，“适用于违反IETF知识产权政策者的制裁”，RFC 6701，DOI 10.17487/RFC6701，2012年8月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6701>.
[RFC6702] Polk, T. and P. Saint-Andre, "Promoting Compliance with Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Disclosure Rules", RFC 6702, DOI 10.17487/RFC6702, August 2012, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6702>.
[RFC6702]Polk，T.和P.Saint Andre，“促进遵守知识产权（IPR）披露规则”，RFC 6702，DOI 10.17487/RFC6702，2012年8月<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6702>.
Editors' Addresses
编辑地址
Scott Bradner 15 High St. Cambridge, MA 02138 United States of America
斯科特·布拉德纳美国马萨诸塞州圣坎布里奇15高中02138
Phone: +1 202 558 5661
Email: sob@sobco.com
Phone: +1 202 558 5661
Email: sob@sobco.com
Jorge Contreras University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law 383 South University St. Salt Lake City, UT 84112 United States of America
豪尔赫孔特雷拉斯犹他大学美利坚合众国盐湖城南部大学法学院383南昆学院
Email: cntreras@gmail.com
Email: cntreras@gmail.com