Re: [OSPF] IPR Disclosure: Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions-04

In message <20130917222336.6526.26287.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
IETF Secretariat writes:

>  
> Dear Alia Atlas, John Drake, Spencer Giacalone, Stefano Previdi, David Ward:
>  
>  An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "OSPF Traffic
> Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions" (draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions) was
> submitted to the IETF Secretariat on 2013-09-17 and has been posted on the "IETF
> Page of Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures"
> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/2199/). The title of the IPR disclosure is
> "Cisco's Statement of IPR Related to draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-
> extensions-04."");
>  
> The IETF Secretariat
>  
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf

Since two of the authors are named on the patent, it is hard to
understand how they could not have known about the IPR.

Since the patent was applied for in 2004 and the first iteration of
this draft was in 2011, and at least two co-authors of the draft knew
about the patent by way of also being co-inventors of the patent, this
appears to be a blatent late disclosure of IPR.

Would the authors please explain how this was allowed to occur.

Also, the patent seems (to me) to apply only to local-repair paths and
not to primary paths.  Would the inventors please confirm (or deny).

I'm not sure how all the prior art on using multiple metrics,
including additive constraints on "paths", could be construed as not
applying to "local-repair paths".  But then again, I'm not a lawyer
and hope never to be one.  The patent system at work again.

Curtis