[Hipsec] CGA IPR history
Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Tue, 13 February 2018 21:54 UTC
Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94CD612D951 for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:54:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.863
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.863 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT=1.449, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 dzVlrCvdJB-y for <hipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:54:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [50.253.254.3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94F9D12711B for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:54:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36A9062205 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:54:36 -0500 (EST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at htt-consult.com
Received: from z9m9z.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (z9m9z.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id uDNrvMbmSjcu for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:54:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from lx120e.htt-consult.com (unknown [192.168.160.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by z9m9z.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2DC1362204 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:54:32 -0500 (EST)
To: hipsec@ietf.org
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
Message-ID: <7d240152-de81-ca7d-73e8-d3417ff1c514@htt-consult.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:54:23 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hipsec/-28JUyuoZ5JShfOcaNJtrZhD_zI>
Subject: [Hipsec] CGA IPR history
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hipsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 21:54:41 -0000
Can someone help me with the history of the IPR filings on CGA? There are a number of IPR filings in CGA itself, RFC3972. But nothing on ORCHID. How did ORCHID avoid the IPR issues related to CGA? This recently came up in a conversation with new work on cryptographic addressing. Thanks for any refresher history as my search foo is weak. Bob
- [Hipsec] CGA IPR history Robert Moskowitz