IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: OpenDNS today announced it has adopted DNSCurve to secure DNS

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Wed, 24 February 2010 18:34 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 277D83A848E for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:34:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.99
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.99 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.056, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 KHLrOJKL4YH9 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:34:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F059E3A8554 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:34:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.20.30.158] (75-101-30-90.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [75.101.30.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o1OIOVR6074962 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:24:32 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p0624080dc7ab1ee1f030@[10.20.30.158]>
In-Reply-To: <20100224165011.GF5166@thunk.org>
References: <874c02a21002231826y613b9f97ya83740ba240f7bf9@mail.gmail.com> <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D02C29D87@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET> <sdzl2yvgru.fsf@wjh.hardakers.net> <874c02a21002240835u7cf4bf60y510cbbc870727852@mail.gmail.com> <20100224165011.GF5166@thunk.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:23:43 -0800
To: tytso@mit.edu
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: OpenDNS today announced it has adopted DNSCurve to secure DNS
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 18:34:43 -0000

At 11:50 AM -0500 2/24/10, tytso@mit.edu wrote:
>I'm not a lawyer, and neither is Bruce Schneier who is quoted in the
>article below, but I suspect he's studied the ECC patent situation
>more than I have (and I looked it quite a bit back when I was chairing
>ipsec).
>
>	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECC_patents
>

draft-mcgrew-fundamental-ecc-02.txt is much more authoritative and up-to-date than that Wikipedia article. Please read it and see if it changes your mind about the patent situation for ECC in IETF protocols.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email