Re: Updated Sender-ID License Faq (was acceptable use)

Alan Hodgson wrote:
> I suggest, therefore, that with the current license requirements, that this
> standard be rejected and a non-encumbered alternative be considered.
Keep in mind that there is at least another alternative: ignore the IPR 
claims as irrelevant and frivilous, and go ahead with the standard 
anyway like the example given in RFC 3669.
Yakov