Re: [TLS] Summary of IPR discussion on draft-ietf-tls-extractor-05

[Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>]

Matthew Campagna <mcampagna at certicom.com> writes:

> In hopes of clarifying,

Hi.  I appreciate this, thanks for joining the discussion.

> It is our intention to foster broad adoption of ECC technology.  The
> grant is meant to cover any necessary Certicom patents and patent
> applications to implement RFC 4492, RFC 5289 or the
> draft-rescorla-tls-suiteb when used with draft-ietf-tls-extractor.  It
> is not making any statement to the draft-ietf-tls-extractor when used
> absent of these three cipher suites.

If you have patents that covers tls-extractor, which you claim in the
#1004 filing, it would help to understand if and how you believe those
patents apply to non-ECC cipher suites.  Thus, what I'm looking for is a
statement on using tls-extractor without those three cipher suites.

Absent such a statement, it seems reasonable to assume that anything is
possible, including that you believe your patents cover the non-ECC
situation, and that you will enforce them.

/Simon