Re: [GROW] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-grow-va-02

[Xu Xiaohu <[e-mail]>]

> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Robert Raszuk [mailto:[e-mail]]
> 发送时间: 2010年6月26日 16:48
> 收件人: Xu Xiaohu
> 抄送: [e-mail]
> 主题: Re: [GROW] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's Statement
about
> IPR related to draft-ietf-grow-va-02
> 
> Xu,
> 
> I am not talking about the draft. I am asking about the patent ?
> 
> if you are using BGP communities to carry policy information what is in
> there which is novel and which requires IPR ?

The key part of this IPR is to make a BGP router to selectively FIB-install
BGP routes according to their BGP community values, together with its own
role (i.e., APR or non-APR for a given prefix).

Best wishes,
Xiaohu

> Thx,
> R.
> 
> 
> > Robert,
> >
> >> -----邮件原件-----
> >> 发件人: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表
Robert
> >> Raszuk
> >> 发送时间: 2010年6月25日 19:26
> >> 收件人: [e-mail]
> >> 主题: Re: [GROW] IPR Disclosure: Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd's
Statement
> > about
> >> IPR related to draft-ietf-grow-va-02
> >>
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> I (as both individual contributor as well as co-author of VA draft)
> >> fully agree with Chris that if needed simple use of BGP communities can
> >> be applied within given domain to carry any form of local policy across
> >> iBGP mesh - that applies to both prefix groups/lists and popular
> >> prefixes using VA terminology.
> >
> >> Reinventing the wheel with some other tool other then those which
> >> already have been successfully used for years makes no sense to me.
> >
> > Agree. Actually the auto-configuration mechanism defined in va-auto
draft
> > DOES use the BGP community to carry the "can-suppress" tag which
determines
> > whether or not the prefix should be suppressed. Hence, we are not
> > reinventing the wheel, and that is why the draft is just informational,
> > rather than standard track.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Xiaohu
> >
> >> With this in mind I am completely not clear what such IPR filing could
> >> be about. Are we discussing IPR of carrying local policy by BGP
> >> communities ? That I am afraid has a decent prior art to 2007 filing.
> >>
> >> Many thx,
> >> R.