Re: [TLS] Proto write-up for TLS exporter

To: Eric Rescorla <ekr at networkresonance.com>

Subject: Re: [TLS] Proto write-up for TLS exporter

Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 16:10:01 +0200

Cc: Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>, TLS at ietf.org

Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:received:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type; bh=F87hCyRzz6s1ZndykYYXVUJ6QjwDL5xJvIbjux6Kq8U=; b=mTSiWNCFAkma2t7sNeTyK2zaTwyrYflA7GVhS0B0iwtZLTMm6buu6P0oG7OhuUAZQX q3cJEs8n2rLfK5OH8ct/62fhfrk8ikgKvIY6zcqjzfaIdGqSA7cGEjjp+BOPT/98fn/B AJm7+qxtcDAnXx0aPAOav1r0DSy9uruJldy4U=

Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=L/gzt10l7AM/r29EmxjuukSGhy4dgLZ2heJ4nzy6fHF9AbbtvgENUGlamkVFhS2O+f OfuldLXK4XlfOr7GNA0HLt9GibZCUGBTSZr4G6/L9S5K9RwGfwzSYe0J4Z65fGHEWi7a F9HusyzQ2gf5lT/cWQe9ivGX7opBTmgi9Yrxk=

In-reply-to: <20090514140437.E84F51A401F at kilo.networkresonance.com>

List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls>

List-help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>

List-id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>

List-post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>

List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>

References: <AC1CFD94F59A264488DC2BEC3E890DE507FD11E4 at xmb-sjc-225.amer.cisco.com> <87preeqpma.fsf at mocca.josefsson.org> <20090513151244.2668950822 at romeo.rtfm.com> <87tz3okj5d.fsf at mocca.josefsson.org> <20090513230017.CF7C650822 at romeo.rtfm.com> <87zldggi29.fsf at mocca.josefsson.org> <20090514140437.E84F51A401F at kilo.networkresonance.com>

Sender: mbadra at gmail.com

> This allows Certicom to claim that the tls-extractor document is covered
> by their patents for non-ECC uses in the future. That claim would not
> be inconsistent with the information filed with the IETF so far. That
> is the loophole I'm concerned with.

While, this is of course true, it's also possible that some other
entity which doesn't participate in IETF at all has patents that apply
to extractor. That wouldn't be inconsistent with the information filed
with the IETF either.

Either you think that Certicom has a BCP 79 obligation to accurately
disclose their patents or they don't. If you do, I think it's
reasonable to conclude that when they say "our patents may cover
X" that they don't believe their patents cover !X. If you don't,
then we could equally well conclude that their patents may
cover drafts they don't even mention.

May it be possible for the draft's authors to review the related Certicom's patents and conclude whatever they are or aren't related to the document in question?

Best regards,
Badra

Re: [TLS] Proto write-up for TLS exporter

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.