Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents

Jim Thompson <jim@smallworks.com> Mon, 17 June 1996 21:31 UTC

Received: from relay.tis.com by neptune.TIS.COM id aa18103; 17 Jun 96 17:31 EDT
Received: by relay.tis.com; id RAA24066; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:33:53 -0400
Received: from sol.tis.com(192.33.112.100) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma024047; Mon, 17 Jun 96 17:33:25 -0400
Received: from relay.tis.com by tis.com (4.1/SUN-5.64) id AA07533; Mon, 17 Jun 96 17:33:24 EDT
Received: by relay.tis.com; id RAA24040; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:33:23 -0400
Received: from hosaka.smallworks.com(192.207.126.1) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma024034; Mon, 17 Jun 96 17:33:19 -0400
Received: from butthead.SmallWorks.COM by hosaka.smallworks.com (5.x/SMI-SVR4) id AA04698; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 16:35:42 -0500
Received: by butthead.SmallWorks.COM (4.1/SPARCbook_POP1.3) id AA09764; Mon, 17 Jun 96 16:31:41 CDT
From: Jim Thompson <jim@smallworks.com>
Message-Id: <9606171631.ZM9762@butthead.smallworks.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 16:31:40 -0500
In-Reply-To: "Carl F. Muckenhirn" <cfm@columbia.sparta.com> "Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents" (Jun 17, 2:56pm)
References: <v02140b01adeb541d4329@[157.185.80.136]>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10oct95)
To: "Carl F. Muckenhirn" <cfm@columbia.sparta.com>, "C. Harald Koch" <chk@border.com>
Subject: Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

I'm not an IP lawyer (though we have one who works here), but this

> Both network ports have the same network address, making the device
transparent
> to the local area network in which it is spliced. The device operates by
> selectively encrypting or decrypting only the data portion of a data packet,
> leaving the routing information contained in the header and  trailer portions
> of the data packet unchanged.

Would seem to leave IPsec in the free and clear (so to speak.)

Jim