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

[Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams at sun.com>]

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 07:44:57PM +0200, Martin Rex wrote:
> I agree with Nico.  If anyone at all should be asked to do a review
> whether the Certicom patent claim covers tls-extractors by accident
> or intentionally (independent of its validity), then this would
> be the IPR holder, i.e. Certicom themselves.

The patent holder can't be forced to do that either, except by denying
them the imprimatur of the IETF standards process for their technologies
(assuming that they want that).  We can ask them though.

> IMHO the discussion is not very fruitful.

Indeed.  We should move on.  There are no claims on the extractor itself
as of right now, thus no need for further controversy.

> The PRF as described in TLS extractors is so totally similar to
> the PRF used in TLS itself over many years that I don't see a
> problem of going for the same track, i.e. standards track.

Some things are obvious.  This is one of them.