[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1029EDBED@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 09:23:03 -0800
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@...ing.com>
To: "David Stevens" <dlstevens@...ibm.com>,
"Pekka Savola" <pekkas@...core.fi>
Cc: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org>, <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 00/05] ipv6: RFC4214 Support
As further clarification, here is the US patent office
transaction history for the SRI application, which shows
that the application was rejected on 8/02/04:
http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnM
z0vM0Y_QjzKLN4gPMATJgFieAfqRqCLGpugijnABX4_83FT9IKBEpDlQxNDCRz8qJzU9MblS
P1jfWz9AvyA3NDSi3NsRAHxEBJg!/delta/base64xml/L0lJSk03dWlDU1lKSi9vQXd3QUF
NWWdBQ0VJUWhDRUVJaEZLQSEvNEZHZ2RZbktKMEZSb1hmckNIZGgvN18wXzE4TC81L3NhLmd
ldEJpYg!!?selectedTab=fileHistorytab&isSubmitted=isSubmitted&dosnum=0972
8253&public_selectedSearchOption=
and here is the 12/01/04 "IPR Status" summary from KAME
stating the basis for including ISATAP in their product:
http://www.kame.net/newsletter/20041201/
Fred
fred.l.templin@...ing.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Templin, Fred L
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 6:42 AM
> To: David Stevens; Pekka Savola
> Cc: David Miller; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org; yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 00/05] ipv6: RFC4214 Support
>
> I think I can clear this up. The patent office rejected
> SRI's patent application, therefore there are no valid
> claims that could prevent ISATAP from being included
> in public domain software releases. Indeed, Microsoft,
> cisco, and FreeBSD/KAME are shipping ISATAP and have
> been doing so for a long time, and I believe there are
> also several others.
>
> Fred
> fred.l.templin@...ing.com
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Stevens [mailto:dlstevens@...ibm.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 11:54 PM
> > To: Pekka Savola
> > Cc: David Miller; Templin, Fred L; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> > netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org; yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/05] ipv6: RFC4214 Support
> >
> > > give it away on this specific instance. I'm not sure if
> you should
> > > attribute to hidden agendas what you can explain by "doing
> > the right
> > > thing" (granted, very few companies do this which may make
> > it suspect,
> > > but still..).
> >
> > Pekka,
> > I'm not assuming hidden agendas here; I simply
> don't know what
> > they mean by "no license for implementers." It doesn't say they
> > relinquish *all* licensing, which would be clearer if
> that's what they
> > mean. If implementers, distributors, and users are included, then
> > who's left that does need licensing? If that answer really
> is nobody,
> > then why bother with "for implementers."?
> > So, I don't think it's a hidden agenda, I think
> they said what
> > they mean. I just don't know what they mean. :-)
> >
> >
> +-DLS
> >
> >
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists