IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents

Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com> Tue, 18 June 1996 03:25 UTC

Received: from relay.tis.com by neptune.TIS.COM id aa23292; 17 Jun 96 23:25 EDT
Received: by relay.tis.com; id XAA28044; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 23:27:45 -0400
Received: from sol.tis.com(192.33.112.100) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma028040; Mon, 17 Jun 96 23:27:16 -0400
Received: from relay.tis.com by tis.com (4.1/SUN-5.64) id AA14591; Mon, 17 Jun 96 23:27:15 EDT
Received: by relay.tis.com; id XAA28035; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 23:27:15 -0400
Received: from servo.qualcomm.com(129.46.128.14) by relay.tis.com via smap (V3.1.1) id xma028031; Mon, 17 Jun 96 23:27:06 -0400
Received: (from karn@localhost) by servo.qualcomm.com (8.7.5/1.0/8.7.2/1.9) id UAA02531; Mon, 17 Jun 1996 20:29:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 20:29:33 -0700
From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Message-Id: <199606180329.UAA02531@servo.qualcomm.com>
To: chk@border.com
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM
In-Reply-To: <96Jun17.114241edt.18448-2@janus.border.com> (chk@border.com)
Subject: Re: UUNET Network Encryption Patents
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

>Filed:		Sep. 13, 1994
>Filed:		Jan. 19, 1994

All the basic concepts of IP Security (especially including what we
now call "tunnel mode") have been widely and publicly known since at
least the original "lunch BOF" that I called at the San Diego IETF
meeting way back in 1992.  So the validity of these patents is not
only seriously in doubt, but there is also the interesting question of
fraud against the PTO for not disclosing all known relevant prior art.

Phil

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status