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

[Simon Josefsson <simon at josefsson.org>]

"Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)" <jsalowey at cisco.com> writes:

> I haven't heard anyone dispute that the current statement referenced in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1004/ pertains to the use of the draft
> with ECC technology.

That is what I have been disputing.  My reasoning is as follows:

1) The #1004 disclosure indicates that Certicom has patents that covers
the tls-extractor document.

2) The PDF says that for use with ECC, Certicom will grant a particular
license.  As far as I understand, the conditions in that license is one
reason the IETF have published ECC related documents as Informational
rather than on the Standards Track.  Other recent cipher suites, such as
RFC 5288, is on the Standards Track.

3) The PDF says nothing about what Certicom's patents on tls-extractor
means for non-ECC situations.

It would be great if Matthew Campagna can clarify 3) for us.

To further clarify my position:

If the patent owner confirms that they do not believe their patents
covers non-ECC situations, I would no longer oppose publication of
tls-extractor on the Standards Track.

As long as the patent owner prevents us from understanding this aspect,
I would continue to oppose publication.

/Simon