Re: [TLS] Last Call: draft-ietf-tls-extractor (Keying Material Exportersfor Transport Layer Security (TLS)) to Proposed Standard

[Dean Anderson <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, Joseph Salowey (jsalowey) wrote:

> Comments inline below:   
> 
> > If your interpretation were correct, then we would have to 
> > say that Certicom is not claiming IPR on _any_ IETF 
> > document---draft or RFC---since none are listed in Section V. 
> > But I think that is obviously incorrect---I think you have 
> > misinterpreted what should be in which section.
> >
> 
> [Joe] Are we both looking at https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1154/?  In
> section V I see several documents listed:
> 
> "RFC 3278, RFC 4109, RFC 4492, RFC 4753, RFC 4754, RFC 4869, RFC 5008,
> RFC 5289, draft-rescorla-tls-suiteb-12, draft-green-secsh-ecc-07,
> draft-igoe-secsh-suiteb-00, draft-ietf-smime-3278bis-07,
> draft-ietf-smime-sha2-11"

You are refering to Section V.C: 

====================
C. If an Internet-Draft or RFC includes multiple parts and it is not 
reasonably apparent which part of such Internet-Draft or RFC is alleged 
to be covered by the patent information disclosed in Section V(A) or 
V(B), it is helpful if the discloser identifies here the sections of the 
Internet-Draft or RFC that are alleged to be so covered:  
 RFC 3278, RFC 4109, RFC 4492, RFC 4753, RFC 4754, RFC 4869, RFC 5008, 
RFC 5289, draft-rescorla-tls-suiteb-12, draft-green-secsh-ecc-07, 
draft-igoe-secsh-suiteb-00, draft-ietf-smime-3278bis-07, 
draft-ietf-smime-sha2-11
====================

Section V.C of IPR 1154 is probably not filled out correctly since it
just states the document name. As you can see from the instructions, the
purpose of Section V.C is to clarify which /sections/ of documents are
covered, and no sections of documents are identified.

Section V.C is only needed if there are sections of a document that need
identification because it is not reasonably apparent which sections are
covered by patent.

By not putting a document in Section V.C, all that is indicated is that
it is 'reasonably apparent' which sections are covered by patent.

Excluding a document (tls-extractor) from Section V.C doesn't mean that
it isn't covered by a patent, it only means that it should be reasonably
apparent which sections of the document are covered.  The fact of patent
coverage is indicated by the presence of the document in Section IV.

		--Dean


-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000