Re: [spfbis] Call for adoption: draft-kitterman-4408bis

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

John Levine <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>As the person who filed the IPR disclosure, I can tell you that it is
>>because someone pointed out
>>http://www.microsoft.com/openspecifications/en/us/programs/osp/security/default.aspx
>>to me.  That page clearly claims to cover RFC 4408.
>
>Not really.  If you follow the backlink, it says that Microsoft
>promises not to sue you for patent infringement if you implement any
>of a list of specifications including RFC 4408.  But it does not
>assert that any of their patents actually cover RFC 4408.
>
>IPR 434 referenced US patent application 10/684020, which has now
>turned into issued patent 7,398,315.  That patent is rather opaque,
>even as patents go, but in a quick read I don't see anything that
>looks relevant to SPF.
>
>I don't know whether anyone from Microsoft is still following this, but
>it would be nice to see if they were willing to update the OSP page
>to include 4408bis, just to put the concerns to bed.

If we get to pick, I'd rather the remove 4408. I've looked at the patent as well and was unable to detect anything relevant to 4408 through the patent speak.

Scott K