IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Idr] IPR in draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-14 [was: Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-14]

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Mon, 16 October 2017 16:28 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35C281323B4 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:28:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 JZ-Su2hP7-OC for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:28:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 2E067126E64 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:28:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1e48G4-0001Ja-MA; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 16:28:52 +0000
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:28:51 -0700
Message-ID: <m2efq3vyyk.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Cc: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>, idr wg <idr@ietf.org>, Kevin Wang <kfwang@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <CA+b+ERm55gTgeqJ_G8wpPxXda3csCKrsCwNaaWFnCLhG9FmW=g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1F4BD63B-3273-469E-A3C6-4365B56724EA@juniper.net> <A0C8EAA9-BB99-4171-9D65-D39ED00A205C@juniper.net> <CA+b+ERm55gTgeqJ_G8wpPxXda3csCKrsCwNaaWFnCLhG9FmW=g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.2 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/rmoa5vwReE2cZ-qv-dUoabmH5bc>
Subject: Re: [Idr] IPR in draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-14 [was: Re: WGLC for draft-ietf-idr-bgp-optimal-route-reflection-14]
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 16:28:55 -0000

> While I am still in process of getting full clarification from Cisco
> on what has been filed without authors knowledge I think the message
> you got from Serpil is incorrect.
> 
> To the best of my current understanding cisco filed some patents with
> claims describing implementation solutions used to implement ideas
> from ORR document not to claim IPR rights to such ideas itself.
> 
> Both are very different and I do not understand while the former would
> in any way impact the IETF process.

perhaps we should let the lawyers be lawyers and we stick to
engineering?  

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email