Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control-00
Paul Wouters <paul@xelerance.com> Mon, 27 October 2008 19:44 UTC
Return-Path: <dnsop-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop-archive@lists.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsop-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF763A694D; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsop@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7242D3A68D0 for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Xx3-NPEPq0zQ for <dnsop@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from newtla.xelerance.com (newtla.xelerance.com [193.110.157.143]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B0123A694D for <dnsop@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tla.xelerance.com (tla.xelerance.com [193.110.157.130]) by newtla.xelerance.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99F63C2D1; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:48:43 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:48:43 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@xelerance.com>
To: bert hubert <bert.hubert@netherlabs.nl>
In-Reply-To: <20081027191110.GA10670@outpost.ds9a.nl>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0810271538080.7247@newtla.xelerance.com>
References: <20081027160900.95AD33A6A0E@core3.amsl.com> <FEB5969C-F0A4-454C-A0BF-7DAF9358E539@jadickinson.co.uk> <002f01c950c6$477eaa80$2000a8c0@tsg1> <20081027191110.GA10670@outpost.ds9a.nl>
User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (LFD 962 2008-03-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: dnsop@ietf.org, TS Glassey <tglassey@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control-00
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/dnsop>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dnsop-bounces@ietf.org
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, bert hubert wrote: > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 11:01:13AM -0800, TS Glassey wrote: >> Yeah and like the other DNSSEC I-D's I dfound numerous things in it that >> would violate the controls put in place by US Patent 6,370,629 of which I >> am one of the two owners and controlling parties to that IP. > > Please start litigating. I've looked at this patent and the other one you > mentioned in the context of DNSSEC, and based on earlier discussions with a > patent attorney, your claims don't look like they would stand up at least in > Dutch courts. I agree. The patent is irrelevant. One example of prior art I can come up with already is Netscape restricting its SSL download in the 90's to US citizens only, based on geogrpahical locations of IP addresses, back in the early day before the Wassenaar Agreement relaxed US export controls, a decade before the filing of this patent in 2002. And last I looked, my DNSSEC servers and clients don't have a GPS, the only part of the "invention" that might possible hold (IANAL) But the Patent Holder seems to think using a physical key to lock out everyone "geospatially located outside my house" seems to violate their patent. I have no idea how DNSSEC possibly relates to this. Paul _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
- [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-control-… John Dickinson
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… TS Glassey
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… bert hubert
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… TS Glassey
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… bert hubert
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… TS Glassey
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… TS Glassey
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… TS Glassey
- Re: [DNSOP] Rude legalese phone call, possibly re… TS Glassey
- [DNSOP] Rude legalese phone call, possibly relate… Paul Wouters
- Re: [DNSOP] Rude legalese phone call, possibly re… Rob Austein
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… Paul Wouters
- [DNSOP] childishness and more patents bullshit Jim Reid
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… Florian Weimer
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… TS Glassey
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… Florian Weimer
- Re: [DNSOP] draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameserver-cont… TS Glassey
- [DNSOP] /admin/ Re: draft-dickinson-dnsop-nameser… Peter Koch
- Re: [DNSOP] childishness and more patents bullshit TS Glassey