Re: [Nea] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls-07

Hi All,

My interpretation of the IPR statement issued by Cisco, in effect, offers two options:

1.  You can use the technology claimed by their patent application in products, royalty-free, as long as you give up all rights to assert ANY patent claim against Cisco, or it's products.  (this is essentially a "patent-kill" option, which would, in theory, grant Cisco the right to use any of your patented technology in products as long as you choose this option #1 to include their claims on PT-TLS in your products.  You're basically agreeing to waive your patent rights if you choose the royalty-free option.)

OR

2.  You can go the royalty option if you decide to ship products based on technology claimed by the patent application

As long as the terms of option #2 are offered in a non-discriminatory fashion to interested parties, I'm assuming this meets the overall spirit of RFC 3979.

I think the WG would agree, that at this point in the process, we would like to see the PT-TLS work advance -- and that any IPR statement asserted against our PT-EAP draft would have to be quite onerous for us to decide otherwise.

If a non-discriminatory policy towards option #2 is available, then I would say the burden of the IPR statement is probably not sufficient to rethink our PT-TLS document.

Randy

On Oct 4, 2012, at 9:23 PM, Stephen Hanna wrote:

> IETF Secretariat wrote:
>> An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled
>> "PT-TLS: A TCP-based Posture Transport (PT) Protocol"
>> (draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls) was submitted to the IETF Secretariat
>> on 2012-10-04
> 
> Well, that's a pain in the neck! I'm not happy to see these
> IPR disclosures come in so late in the process. PT-TLS is
> already with the IESG and PT-EAP has passed two WGLCs and
> is almost ready to go to the IESG. This IPR should have
> been disclosed much earlier, if at all possible.
> 
> At this time, I would encourage nea participants to read
> (or re-read) RFC 3979, which describes how we handle IPR
> disclosures in IETF. Also read the IPR disclosures to see
> what's included in the patents in question and what IPR
> licensing terms are being offered.
> 
> I would ask Cisco to please provide a link to the actual
> patent application (since I guess there is no patent yet
> and I can't find the patent application) so that we can
> see what technology is claimed to be covered.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Steve
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nea-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:nea-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> IETF Secretariat
>> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 5:45 PM
>> To: Paul_Sangster@symantec.com; ncamwing@cisco.com; jsalowey@cisco.com
>> Cc: nea@ietf.org; turners@ieca.com; ipr-announce@ietf.org
>> Subject: [Nea] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to
>> draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls-07
>> 
>> 
>> Dear Paul Sangster, Nancy Cam-Winget, Joseph A. Salowey:
>> 
>> An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "PT-
>> TLS: A TCP-
>> based Posture Transport (PT) Protocol" (draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls) was
>> submitted to
>> the IETF Secretariat on 2012-10-04 and has been posted on the "IETF
>> Page of
>> Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures"
>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1890/). The title of the IPR
>> disclosure is
>> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-nea-pt-tls-07."");
>> 
>> The IETF Secretariat
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nea mailing list
>> Nea@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea
> _______________________________________________
> Nea mailing list
> Nea@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nea
> 