RE: Looking for statement of patent issues re ISAKMP/Oakley

[[e-mail] (Kenneth Durazzo)]

Bob,

No flame.. it would just be nice to be able to implement good technology
for use in the public domain without "paying through the nose" for it
(read: standardization) which would be good for all. I do understand
however that money is money (business is business) and RSA could not
continue to exist without having someone pay for their services.

Good Day,

Ken Durazzo
Systems Engineer - Bay Networks "Where information flows"  


At 09:38 AM 3/11/98 -0800, Bob Baldwin wrote:
>Paul,
>	RSA Data Security owns exclusive rights to the
>Schnorr patent and RSA's lawyers claim that any implementation
>of DSS would infringe this patent.  The US government
>disagrees with this interpretation.  The issue has not
>been tested in court.
>	The current shipping version of BSAFE (3.0) from RSA
>contains an implementation of DSS.  The BSAFE 4.0 release,
>which is currently in beta, contains all the extra
>algorithms needed to fully comply with the FIPS that defines
>DSS.  For example, BSAFE 4.0 includes the SHA1 based random
>number generator described in the FIPS document.
>	Most vendors of IPSec products have already licensed
>BSAFE, so the possible patent issues are not a problem.
>              --Bob Baldwin
>                Technical Director E-Commerce
>                RSA Data Security
>
>P.S.  For all of you who want to flame me or RSA for having
>patents or for having lawyers, go ahead.  After my first
>year at RSA I got used to being flamed whenever I post.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:	Paul Koning [SMTP:[e-mail]]
>> Sent:	Wednesday, March 11, 1998 8:48 AM
>> To:	[e-mail]
>> Subject:	Looking for statement of patent issues re ISAKMP/Oakley
>> 
>> I was putting together a memo on licensing needs for IPSec products,
>> and looked in the various drafts for guidance.  From what I
>> understand, IETF standards-track documents are supposed to contain a
>> section discussing any patent issues that may pertain to the
>> technology in question.
>> 
>> A number of the transform specs contain such sections (e.g., DES and
>> IDEA).  Somewhat to my surprise, the ISAKMP/Oakley documents do not.
>> 
>> I also looked in other places (specifically, Scheier) for input.  It
>> mentioned the well-known fact that RSA is subject to patents and
>> licenses.  No confusion there.  
>> 
>> Scheier also discussed the situation for DSS.  As I read it, it sounds
>> like the patent situation there is muddled.  In particular, he
>> mentions a U.S. Government patent (D. Kravitz) supposedly generally
>> licensed at no cost -- but also mentions that claims have been made
>> that the Schorr patent applies as well.
>> 
>> Question:  Does anyone have any further insight on this topic?  And
>> could this be added to the document?
>> 
>> 	paul 
>> 
>> -- 
>> !---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> ! Paul Koning, NI1D, C-24183
>> ! Xedia Corporation, 119 Russell Street, Littleton, MA 01460, USA
>> ! phone: [phone] ext 115, fax: [phone]
>> ! email: [e-mail]
>> ! Pgp:   27 81 A9 73 A6 0B B3 BE 18 A3 BF DD 1A 59 51 75
>> !---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> ! "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over 
>> !  any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to
>> prevent
>> !  harm to others.  His own good, either physical or moral, is not
>> !  a sufficient warrant."    -- John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty" 1859
>