IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] IPR issue

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Fri, 29 January 2010 09:51 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5359D3A6938 for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:51:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.547
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.052, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 LCT72r1DLnlX for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:51:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 104C23A6820 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:51:22 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsUAAFI+YkuQ/uCWe2dsb2JhbACbSgEBFiQGpzOXV4RABA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,367,1262563200"; d="scan'208";a="56603566"
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2010 09:51:43 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-201.cisco.com (xbh-ams-201.cisco.com [144.254.75.7]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o0T9phcf027766 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:51:43 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-107.cisco.com ([144.254.74.82]) by xbh-ams-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:51:43 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:51:43 +0100
Message-ID: <6A2A459175DABE4BB11DE2026AA50A5D0123536A@XMB-AMS-107.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <F57AACE5-BD7E-4F0D-9DA2-4541BD25BAB8@cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Roll] IPR issue
Thread-Index: AcqgUrf0pZxpsR3gSe+vE7B8IFjiVAAatrLg
References: <F57AACE5-BD7E-4F0D-9DA2-4541BD25BAB8@cisco.com>
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "JP Vasseur (jvasseur)" <jvasseur@cisco.com>, ROLL WG <roll@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jan 2010 09:51:43.0396 (UTC) FILETIME=[A9AB4E40:01CAA0C8]
Subject: Re: [Roll] IPR issue
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:51:24 -0000

Hi JP,

Cisco announced IPR that might relate to the RPL work to the ROLL ML
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/current/msg01181.html on April
16th. As we exposed that IPR prior to the actual work, we decided to be
very open and announced a rather broad list of publications at that
time. Since then, the Cisco IPR issue had been discussed a number of
times in this Mailing List. I never sensed a huge problem with it so
far. This did not strike me as a surprise considering Cisco's terms.

As I had mentioned before, Cisco's terms are quite generous.  In
layman's terms, Cisco will not sue anyone for products that implement
the standard under any of its essential patents, and reserves the right
to defend itself if someone sues Cisco for patent infringement.  I
believe this is essentially similar to a royalty-free license.  (I'm an
Engineer, not a Lawyer, so I'd encourage people in this group interested
in the terms to see the exact language for themselves:
http://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/IPR/cisco-ipr-draft-dt-roll-rpl-01.txt).  

Given that Cisco is currently the only one who has filed an IPR
declaration here, I don't understand those who are arguing that changing
course now, and possibly subjecting the standard to other IPR licensing
commitments that are not royalty-free, is a good thing for the WG.
Moreover, numerous IETF standards have thrived with similar declarations
without creating IPR problems.  I trust that the breadth of Cisco's
commitment will give everyone enough comfort to move past this issue.

Cheers,

Pascal


-----Original Message-----
From: roll-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
JP Vasseur (jvasseur)
Sent: jeudi 28 janvier 2010 20:47
To: ROLL WG; Pascal Thubert
Subject: [Roll] IPR issue

Dear all,

Some of you expressed some concerns about IPR on RPL, more specifically,
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipr-announce/current/msg00167.html

Pascal Thubert, since you are the closest to this issue, could you  
please
shed some light on the IPR statement for that invention ?

Thanks.

JP.

_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
Roll@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email