Re: [IPsec] IPR statement for draft-detienne-ikev2-recovery

Frederic Detienne <> Mon, 22 March 2010 08:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FB5A3A688A for <>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:51:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.469
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OtsgCoL7Wb-E for <>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:51:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B323E3A6881 for <>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o2M8pLvc025533; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:51:21 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o2M8pLXS025524; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:51:21 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Frederic Detienne <>
In-Reply-To: <p0624080fc7bc343db7ab@[]>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:51:21 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <p0624080fc7bc343db7ab@[]>
To: Paul Hoffman <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077)
Cc: IPsecme WG <>, "Pratima Sethi \(psethi\)" <>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPR statement for draft-detienne-ikev2-recovery
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:51:08 -0000

Hi Paul,

I am afraid you are mistaken. Yoav, Yaron, Pratima and I had a discussion about the draft's IPR back in Dublin in July 2008. We told back then that we would have rights released. The process takes its own time but as far as Pratima and I are concerned, we did due diligence.

Will you share your assumptions directly with us next time ?



On 09 Mar 2010, at 18:37, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> Greetings again. Cisco has recently posted an IPR statement that is relevant to our charter. Please see <>. You can see the patent application referenced in the IPR statement at <>.
> Before reacting to this announcement, please review the IETF's IPR policy at <>, and please read the specific IPR statement carefully. You may wish to inform any legal counsel you have about this.
> On a personal note, I believe that it would have been much more appropriate for Cisco to have let the WG know about this IPR before we put the draft by name in our charter. I also note that at least one of the co-authors on the named draft was not informed of the IPR; in my opinion, this is particularly inappropriate.
> We will begin the discussion of which secure crash discovery protocol the WG wants to adopt in the next few days, and this IPR statement might or might not affect the outcome, based on what the WG desires.
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list