IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6lo] questions about address protected ND: draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Wed, 17 August 2016 20:56 UTC

Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E56FF12D737; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9qAqJSBDgc3b; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x244.google.com (mail-ua0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E64212D740; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x244.google.com with SMTP id 74so12575868uau.3; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:56:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=5Z9NIHRpmTCskXEgmvm0uc0q8eOPcUdF8cbyKj8cIJ8=; b=NVroOUtg9EvcW71ImPx68AcAm84GjkScdTHh/z/H7L2CnZC+2tuvRWRqps+qXJTK9U Rpqc/ZXDaIGaadh3WhxvSWVoIC1fCzNMckNQa84ciOxqxFu3Ow3WEexo32A7HQhh8DdM eiUefNlqxvdnJnuSIouc+hSYiaGto7N0RDRapGdE9loF+0GMzlIn7P9X6rFDcLp22cS2 v0WQBGTqaODQYp0ThalnB5pTGk2QF7VwzwqaQdzKhAbnAEBzU/MOwYrWN0NFeLjdN7Q7 gAmKi8neZ60QM84pRqprV/IE68YLfoEKtMThy420NkBe6uTsMmux/RAred/SRcV1a8U/ ZBjQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5Z9NIHRpmTCskXEgmvm0uc0q8eOPcUdF8cbyKj8cIJ8=; b=UlT5cQCbQ73tY2IKw89OPRfZ/LuDF4Eek2z7o4zTJN8kkSdeg2Jz8ZMXgXX0mYY+RH S6m0FUBXJychi2bESytZ7uTZnZBHyJF81IY4JVsZwIaHB2t0tiim2u009e6/FJ6eVxp1 0yPpR6aTP2GtS766vffmV2sats8J+Mx6bUN5WiIVKKnFPW/48mH4k6JDXD70vVb8Ch1v gJ69YMxsj1q1Xo5S0C5NsSCrbF6VzDBM2jM1ZuROZtauVrxX7sUNluNfg1grCCOfy0be 6Ztr75lSlDY9791TJMREUhPbhMff6LEL4jhks8864SpytqjuwAdPvOYKGNecbNkyg7gF 0cCw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouvnGNPXdrTsEVUsHKKGYhfzTH4Y0zMi+iWdZNBnDOgUptKlvCcuN/mE3NaiEBq6rCx4boSbF0tn+XwEOA==
X-Received: by 10.176.68.226 with SMTP id n89mr19647925uan.98.1471467390612; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:56:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.159.40.167 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:56:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <21681.1471448771@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
References: <22880.1471440526@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <f8dbb3f22fdb4cea8aab3045b9ca8f00@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <21681.1471448771@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 15:56:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAce_63SOSzDpZQMQQ-cFUqhVVgfLE-n+4x__ZEFcNybSuQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/Cc90U0aP-7JHBfkuIIOnQ7VX51o>
Cc: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, "draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd@ietf.org" <draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd@ietf.org>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6lo] questions about address protected ND: draft-sarikaya-6lo-ap-nd
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
List-Id: "Mailing list for the 6lo WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6lo/>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 20:56:36 -0000

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Michael Richardson
<mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>
> thanks for the reply.
>
> Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
>     > It is largely unwritten Michael,
>
>     > That's ultimately a WG decision, and part of that decision is that we
>     > want to assess if the IPR on CGA is an issue or not.
>
>     > My take is that we should adopt the work if we agree on the overall
>     > idea, knowing that CGA is one way of getting there; and then refine
>     > this as a WG.
>
> a) Hosnieh's proposals
>    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-rafiee-6man-ssas/
>
>    might not suffer from the same IPR.
>
> b) I wonder what is the expiry on the IPR. CGA is more than a decade old now.
>

Date(s) granted or applied for (YYYY-MM-DD):
303951.01 - 2003/03/27
301073.02 - 2002/09/12

I think that these patents do not expire before 20 years.
But Microsoft grants royalty free licensing to all implementers.

Behcet
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email