On Oct 21 2004, at 17:49 Uhr, Tim Bray wrote:
If the IETF wants to ignore history and build an Internet where that
doesn't hold, feel free, but it's not a very interesting kind of
place.
This has been rehashed a lot, but there are two little facts left out
from the current repetition of the discussion:
1) There are technologies being standardized in the IETF that don't
impact the entire Internet.
So what if Republican Parcel Ricochets [name slightly changed] require
IPR -- you can still build viable Internets without them, and it is
still useful to have some standards how the Internet uses them, if
somebody wants to. [There were IPR claims on Ethernet, by the way, and
I do support RFC1042 staying around.]
2) There are lots of patents that reasonable people have to ignore to
stay sane.
Imagine someone patented sending only certain bits of a protocol data
item in a packet to save space, or maybe sending checksums along to
verify protocol operation.
Should that hold any further development of HDLC, NTP, or TCP?
This is not a theoretical consideration.
(I apologize about the thinly veiled references to actual IPR claims.
I try to never discuss IPR claims on a mailing list.)
I'm all for a W3C-like stance on standards that do affect the whole
Internet.
It's hard work [TM], though, and there are no simple answers until
software interoperability patents go the way of the Dodo.
Gruesse, Carsten
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf