RE: info on new nat-t

"Jayant Shukla" <jshukla@trlokom.com> Sun, 24 February 2002 04:09 UTC

Received: from lists.tislabs.com (portal.gw.tislabs.com [192.94.214.101]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g1O49K326811; Sat, 23 Feb 2002 20:09:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id WAA21209 Sat, 23 Feb 2002 22:11:55 -0500 (EST)
From: Jayant Shukla <jshukla@trlokom.com>
To: 'Derek Atkins' <warlord@mit.edu>
Cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: RE: info on new nat-t
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2002 19:20:04 -0800
Message-ID: <000001c1bce2$2756b830$0100a8c0@trlhpc1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <sjmit8nzv9y.fsf@kikki.mit.edu>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk

> 
> If you are referring to your patent-pending solution,
> then that is a non-starter and is not interesting.

People who do work like to benefit from it, like it or not. I am sure
you don't consult for free either. As far as interest is concerned, you
will be surprised. I expect even more of it as people find the
limitations of and problems with NAT-T.

While our intention is to give away the related patent rights in _full_
to IETF soon, we do wish to benefit a bit from it. We will submit an ID
later and discuss the release of IP at that time. 

BTW, you might recall the NAT-T authors also claimed patents rights
early on and I don't recall you talking about IP issues then. In fact,
thanks to us, they gave up their IP soon after we released our original
draft. Also, you might want to read the SSH IP claim in case you think
they have given up all claims on their IP.

Regards,
Jayant