Re: [IPsec] IPR Disclosure: Certicom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ipsecme-dh-checks-04

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Fri, 10 May 2013 17:20 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 364DC21F85C3 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:20:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id t--gYlFLuTJm for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B404621F8536 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:20:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.90] (50-1-98-173.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [50.1.98.173]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r4AHKtHT099023 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 May 2013 10:20:56 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <1679.1368206013@sandelman.ca>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 10:20:55 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3A048F7F-4E75-43C4-9D7F-65A3298C5DAC@vpnc.org>
References: <20130509194111.30890.3049.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1679.1368206013@sandelman.ca>
To: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPR Disclosure: Certicom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-ipsecme-dh-checks-04
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 17:20:58 -0000

On May 10, 2013, at 10:13 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:

> I can not speculate as to whether there is prior art, but it seems to
> match what we have been discussing.


<chair-hat on>
"We" have not been discussing it, and nor should we. Certicom has filed numerous IPR statements with the IETF over more than a decade. Earlier discussions of earlier IPR statements have not come to any general understanding of what Certicom claims and what they intend to do with those claims. In the absence of that understanding (which can be aided by Certicom at any time), there is no point in using the WG mailing list for guessing.

WG participants who want to read more about IPR are advised to see <https://www.ietf.org/ipr/>.

--Paul Hoffman