Re: [NSIS] IPR Disclosure: The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-nsis-tunnel-13

"Fu, Xiaoming" <fu@cs.uni-goettingen.de> Wed, 08 December 2010 07:53 UTC

Return-Path: <fu@cs.uni-goettingen.de>
X-Original-To: nsis@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nsis@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 226573A68FA for <nsis@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:53:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.214
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.214 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KdT0ueBwjhbq for <nsis@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:53:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailer.gwdg.de (mailer.gwdg.de [134.76.10.26]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF92B3A68F1 for <nsis@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Dec 2010 23:53:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gwdexc-fe1.exc.top.gwdg.de ([134.76.26.171] helo=vsmtpgwdexc.exc.top.gwdg.de) by mailer.gwdg.de with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <fu@cs.uni-goettingen.de>) id 1PQErb-0004Lq-Di; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 08:54:59 +0100
Received: from vs2.exc.top.gwdg.de ([134.76.26.192]) by vsmtpgwdexc.exc.top.gwdg.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 8 Dec 2010 08:54:58 +0100
Received: from 134.76.26.176 ([134.76.26.176]) by VS2.exc.top.gwdg.de ([134.76.26.182]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 8 Dec 2010 07:54:59 +0000
References: <16948_1291392106_ZZ0LCV004U30IYQ3.00_20101203160010.338FE28C1CF@core3.amsl.com> <4CF91E92.4090109@tkk.fi> <16948_1291628001_ZZ0LD00044K2JKHH.00_4CFCADD6.2010300@kit.edu> <4CFD3A48.90803@tkk.fi> <15612_1291676254_ZZ0LD100LV63RXO4.00_12593_1291676253_4CFD6A5D_12593_1304_1_4CFD6A4B.5070304@kit.edu> <4CFF2F40.5020207@tkk.fi>
In-Reply-To: <4CFF2F40.5020207@tkk.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 8C148a)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID: <5E82459A-1EB9-47BC-B2E8-D934A8CC4BBC@cs.uni-goettingen.de>
Thread-Topic: [NSIS] IPR Disclosure: The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-nsis-tunnel-13
Thread-Index: AcuWrTXx88MKygMtRYWHfTFJRPTf1Q==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: "Fu, Xiaoming" <fu@cs.uni-goettingen.de>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 08:55:20 +0100
To: Jukka Manner <jukka.manner@tkk.fi>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Dec 2010 07:54:58.0826 (UTC) FILETIME=[35EA7EA0:01CB96AD]
X-Virus-Scanned: (clean) by exiscan+sophie
Cc: nsis@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [NSIS] IPR Disclosure: The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-nsis-tunnel-13
X-BeenThere: nsis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Next Steps in Signaling <nsis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/nsis>
List-Post: <mailto:nsis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 07:53:35 -0000

I would vote for c).
Xiaoming


On 8 Dec 2010, at 08:10, "Jukka Manner" <jukka.manner@tkk.fi> wrote:

> Right.
> 
> I went over the history and the QoS NSLP introduced the binding concept in early 2004, so 2.5 years before the patent application was filed. So, the QoS NSLP is not affected and most of the IPR itself is invalid. Whether the patent is valid when you apply the same published concept and technology when binging tunnel sessions instead of QoS sessions, I don't know.
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-nsis-qos-nslp-02
> 
> Moreover, the application was filed four months _after_ the document describing the binding for tunnels was approved as a WG item.
> 
> Since then the first actual technical changes to the spec were done in late 2008, two years after the patent application was filed.
> 
> Jukka
> 
> On 12/07/2010 12:57 AM, Roland Bless wrote:
>> Hi Jukka,
>> 
>> On 06.12.2010 20:32, Jukka Manner wrote:
>>> Hi Roland, thanks for your detailed analysis. You are right that the QoS
>>> NSLP would not necessarily included the binding concept had we known
>>> Columbia had a hidden IPR on it. So, essentially the IPR also affects
>>> the QoS NSLP. And the issue with RFC 2764 is pretty good, actually -
>>> interesting how the same stuff gets patented years after publishing it
>>> the first time. ;)
>> 
>> Not quite. AFAIK it is a patent _application_, but not a valid patent
>> yet. IMHO, RFC 2746 is a very close match and thus the patent should
>> not be granted w.r.t. most of its claims.
>> 
>> Regards,
>>  Roland
>> _______________________________________________
>> nsis mailing list
>> nsis@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis
> 
> -- 
> Jukka MJ Manner, Professor, PhD.  Phone:  +358+(0)9+470 22481
> Aalto University                  Mobile: +358+(0)50+5112973
> Department of Communications      Fax:    +358+(0)9+470 22474
> and Networking (Comnet)           Office: G320a (Otakaari 5A)
> P.O. Box 13000, FIN-00076 Aalto   E-mail: jukka.manner@tkk.fi
> Finland                           WWW:    www.comnet.tkk.fi
> _______________________________________________
> nsis mailing list
> nsis@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis