From: Scott Brim [mailto:sbrim(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com]
On Thu, May 30, 2002 10:59:27AM -0400, RJ Atkinson wrote:
My druthers would be to have an IETF policy explicitly saying
that the first choice is to use unencumbered technology if it
can be made to work, second choice is encumbered but
royalty-free technology, and last choice is "fair and reasonable
licence terms" (or whatever the equivalent correct legal wording
might be for that last).
and if one solution is 120% better technically than another, but has a
RAND license associated with it? What if it's 170% better?
The de-facto policy in these cases has been to choose the
less-encumbered technology as the standard (i.e. MUST implement), and
the more-encumbered technology an option (MAY implement). For example,
when RSA was still encumbered and Diffie-Hellman was not, the IETF
settled on making Diffie-Hellman mandatory, RSA optional. Maybe this
should be documented.
-- Christian Huitema