Re: [mpls] Is IPR really a problem?

Andrew Alston - IETF <andrew-ietf@liquid.tech> Sat, 25 February 2023 09:49 UTC

Return-Path: <andrew-ietf@liquid.tech>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6ADC14F744 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 01:49:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=liquid.tech
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8NhSpaFk9ZDy for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 01:48:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eu-smtp-delivery-182.mimecast.com (eu-smtp-delivery-182.mimecast.com [185.58.86.182]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25E38C14F737 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 01:48:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=liquid.tech; s=mimecast20210406; t=1677318532; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=LUXhaz8lSZdED5KpMDC98PD/NW992jRfKjTbsYGrUKo=; b=eN6m/JLb+hBIIQU9SUPwH4tm6NA5JRhmvxidKyTQRZbrUWF2CMAOwaCUHyRRwchuFxkadR aVU3oV92oxMC0QbvI8u3gQQkqpwKvxSiomRzTFYCbjwWm2yw7UEDcts+i14dZ1mAV8/0R3 x8GGhNXZ7mLGsW2fUawreYrohNkeqyU=
Received: from EUR04-DB3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-db3eur04lp2057.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.12.57]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id uk-mta-61-LnX_-5atNIuKQCPsRdd3bA-1; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 09:48:48 +0000
X-MC-Unique: LnX_-5atNIuKQCPsRdd3bA-1
Received: from AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:20b:1b3::22) by AS2PR03MB9816.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:20b:608::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.6134.24; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 09:48:44 +0000
Received: from AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::cab3:b843:db95:73da]) by AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::cab3:b843:db95:73da%3]) with mapi id 15.20.6134.025; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 09:48:44 +0000
From: Andrew Alston - IETF <andrew-ietf@liquid.tech>
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
CC: mpls <mpls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Is IPR really a problem?
Thread-Index: AQHZR3cY/niCGfAGb0+am+X3g8OQ867ctZoAgAARpgCAAH/6gIABAieAgAEj8uA=
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2023 09:48:44 +0000
Message-ID: <AM7PR03MB64519A557C25815979895B45EEA99@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <25FA3321-06B4-48A9-B019-130901523C97@gmail.com> <9B0BE22C-84AE-4DA5-938F-187C23C93FA6@tony.li> <906902B0-B902-4B1D-8E80-79422C37A239@gmail.com> <Y/gLqdcjSP8HbDBy@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <81B1AADB-002E-467D-AB68-1E5335304464@tony.li>
In-Reply-To: <81B1AADB-002E-467D-AB68-1E5335304464@tony.li>
Accept-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b_ActionId=4d025980-932e-45d0-9420-4e2df7fba411; MSIP_Label_76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b_ContentBits=0; MSIP_Label_76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b_Method=Privileged; MSIP_Label_76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b_Name=76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b; MSIP_Label_76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b_SetDate=2023-02-25T09:47:44Z; MSIP_Label_76e4e90f-e797-41e5-9d55-c6534a82165b_SiteId=68792612-0f0e-46cb-b16a-fcb82fd80cb1
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AM7PR03MB6451:EE_|AS2PR03MB9816:EE_
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: ba5fbd44-e652-4a3f-44fe-08db17157c05
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230025)(4636009)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(396003)(366004)(136003)(451199018)(122000001)(66899018)(66574015)(4326008)(55016003)(8676002)(76116006)(66446008)(66556008)(66946007)(53546011)(8936002)(64756008)(52536014)(41300700001)(38100700002)(9686003)(33656002)(5660300002)(38070700005)(26005)(186003)(966005)(110136005)(71200400001)(6506007)(316002)(66476007)(478600001)(7696005)(2906002)(166002)(86362001)(83380400001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: 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
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: liquid.tech
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: ba5fbd44-e652-4a3f-44fe-08db17157c05
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 25 Feb 2023 09:48:44.5060 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 68792612-0f0e-46cb-b16a-fcb82fd80cb1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: zsUswiMhDqRubQn0yZCXnP5LohjI2ovWWgPSPlmSDVSYgiWrtqfqlrU4/1jR79QrRYwyTLV/OfYdUK0D4pVLBHC3yL6FtUvLFsasy+WRHJ0=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: AS2PR03MB9816
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: liquid.tech
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_AM7PR03MB64519A557C25815979895B45EEA99AM7PR03MB6451eurp_"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/RCvMJF3u7BDioLh7ZoenhXWIuOc>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Is IPR really a problem?
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2023 09:49:01 -0000

Sending this purely as a contributor and not wearing other hats.

Heading up the department that I do in my day job, as we develop several products for the markets in which we operate, the IPR terms on the technologies we choose to implement are important to us.

I have no issues with MAD terms - because I know full well that if we run into legal issues under MAD terms it’s because we chose to take an action that is under our control.  Under the terms proposed on the IPR for this technology though, I find myself in another position.

A.) there is a potential that I would be unable to open-source code that used this technology - that poses certain challenges
B.) until I have knowledge of what the usage of said technology is going to cost, I cannot begin implementation - writing code and developing features is expensive and time consuming. This means that by the time these terms are fully known, and that decision is taken, chances are I will be well behind the development code of larger organizations that can afford to roll that dice.  That benefits the larger players and hurts the smaller players.
C.) I divide technology into that which is “optional” and that which is “mandatory” for an MVP. Technology that is as ubiquitous as MPLS would fall high onto my mandatory MVP list. What this means however is that the day I sell any product I have created I have an additional cost which lengthens the ROE on development time and cost, and this can affect product viability. Again, this places smaller players at a disadvantage to those that can afford to roll the dice.

As such, while I cannot and will not comment on the validity of the IPR - I will say that I do not support moving forward under the terms offered on this IPR, and should we move forward - I would ask the working group to work with me to find an alternative solution that is not covered under such terms - such that there is an option. This is as per section 7 of RFC8179.

Thanks

Andrew


From: mpls <mpls-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Tony Li
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2023 7:22 PM
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
Cc: mpls <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Is IPR really a problem?


Toerless,

> I do not understand why any of those companies contributing most to the
> IETF routing area would shy away from IPR and royalties: We see left and
> right in the industry how Internet technologies become commoditized, and
> almost no one of the successful companies that is commoditizing IP/MPLS
> network technologies is contributing significantly to the IETF RTG efforts
> or innovating around its core technologies.


We live in significantly different universes. In my reality, there’s a large block of
successful companies that have been collaborating on those technologies.
I’ve been a first hand witness to it since 1991.

With one notable exception (which backfired), it has been done under MAD terms.
This is only fair: we operate under rough consensus rules. We try to participate as
individuals, but the motivations of the respective companies is clear: things are better
when we cooperate. A rising tide lifts all boats. And IPR revenue would be a tiny fraction
of what is available in the market space. We do not block acceptance of other companies’
proposals just on a competitive basis.

When one company decides to break with this tradition, then it tilts the playing field.
Suddenly, one company expects to be paid directly for their IPR and for the rest
of the community to simply accept that, despite other companies previously sharing their IPR.


> I would have issues with anything IPR for "The Internet" protocol/service aspects,
> because i think the Internet as a service is the proper "must be free for all to implement".


That’s exactly where I’m at. If you haven’t noticed, MPLS is core to the operation of the Internet.
Traffic engineering is a requirement for all large scale networks, not just Tier 1 backbones.
Routing protocols are fine for advertising reachability, but by themselves do not provide a
cost-effective network.

MNA, if it is to be a useful, widely deployed technology, needs broad implementation
and availability. IPR restrictions will cause some players to balk and result in spotty acceptance
and ultimate failure.

Regards,
Tony


_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org<mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>


Public