Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents
"Carl F. Muckenhirn" <cfm@columbia.sparta.com> Mon, 17 June 1996 22:13 UTC
Received: from relay.tis.com by neptune.TIS.COM id aa18848; 17 Jun 96 18:13 EDT
Received: by relay.tis.com; id SAA25401; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 18:15:31 -0400
Received: from sol.tis.com(192.33.112.100) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma025395; Mon, 17 Jun 96 18:15:02 -0400
Received: from relay.tis.com by tis.com (4.1/SUN-5.64) id AA08816; Mon, 17 Jun 96 18:15:01 EDT
Received: by relay.tis.com; id SAA25392; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 18:15:01 -0400
Received: from bugs_bunny.columbia.sparta.com(157.185.80.205) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma025387; Mon, 17 Jun 96 18:14:59 -0400
Received: from [157.185.80.136] (blackbird.columbia.SPARTA.COM) by columbia.sparta.com (4.1/cfm-7-21-95) id AA26876; Mon, 17 Jun 96 18:17:06 EDT
Message-Id: <v02140b02adeb898bd42b@[157.185.80.136]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 18:17:21 -0400
To: Jim Thompson <jim@smallworks.com>
From: "Carl F. Muckenhirn" <cfm@columbia.sparta.com>
Subject: Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents
Cc: "Carl F. Muckenhirn" <cfm@columbia.sparta.com>, "C. Harald Koch" <chk@border.com>, ipsec@TIS.COM
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
At 4:31 PM 6/17/96, Jim Thompson wrote: >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 Pointing this out reminds me of a "non-military" application. The "Bump in the Stack Encryptor" by Steve Bellovin (et al, I just can't remember who al is). A few years back provides exactly this functionality. carl.
- UUNET Network Encryption Patents C. Harald Koch
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Jack De Winter
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents John Ioannidis
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents C. Harald Koch
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Per Unell
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents John Gilmore
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Robert Moskowitz
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Steven Bellovin
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents MarkVon
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents PALAMBER.US.ORACLE.COM
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents PALAMBER.US.ORACLE.COM
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Perry E. Metzger
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Carl F. Muckenhirn
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Robert Moskowitz
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Jim Thompson
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Perry E. Metzger
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Carl F. Muckenhirn
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Jim Thompson
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Perry E. Metzger
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Phil Karn
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Phil Karn
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Jim Thompson
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Steven Bellovin
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Joe Tardo
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Jonathan M. Smith
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Stephen Kent
- Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents Stephen Kent
- Re: UPenn Network Encryption Patent John Gilmore
- Re: UPenn Network Encryption Patent Jonathan M. Smith