Hi all,
In IEEE we are admonished to never discuss the essentiality or validity of
patent claims. I cannot believe this is considered an appropriate discussion in
IETF.
Regards,
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: pwe3-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:pwe3-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Yaakov Stein
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:44 AM
To: mmorrow(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com; lmartini(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com;
tom(_dot_)nadeau(_at_)bt(_dot_)com; Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha);
david(_dot_)i(_dot_)allan(_at_)ericsson(_dot_)com; Busschbach, Peter B (Peter)
Cc: IETF(_at_)core3(_dot_)amsl(_dot_)com; Secretariat;
pwe3(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; adrian(_dot_)farrel(_at_)huawei(_dot_)com;
andrew(_dot_)g(_dot_)malis(_at_)verizon(_dot_)com; stbryant(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [PWE3] Posting of IPR Disclosure related to Cisco's Statement of
IPR relating to draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-12
This disclosure (1311) quotes application US20080089227A1: Protecting
multi-segment pseudowires which may impact draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy, and
perhaps ICCP, MS-PW architecture, and MS-PW setup.
There is no apparent connection with oam-msg-map - in fact the claims stress
that the triggers are failures of PSN elements (e.g. S-PEs) and are NOT from
the ACs, making any connection untenable.
A previous disclosure by the same company (863) refers to
20080285466 : Interworking between MPLS/IP and Ethernet OAM mechanisms
which may impact mpls-eth-oam-iwk, but not oam-msg-map, unless one interprets
the first claim and its dependents much more broadly than supported by the
background and description.
Can someone from the company claiming this IPR fix the information in these
disclosures ?
At very least that company is required to disclose IPR is holds with respect to
the appropriate drafts (unless it is willing to risk forfeiting its rights with
respect to these ...).
However, with respect to oam-msg-map I would like to request that it consider
removing inappropriate disclosures.
Of course, if after consideration it believes that these disclosures ARE
appropriate, I would love to hear the reasoning.
Y(J)S
-----Original Message-----
From: IETF Secretariat [mailto:ietf-ipr(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 18:46
To: mmorrow(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com; Yaakov Stein; lmartini(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com;
tom(_dot_)nadeau(_at_)bt(_dot_)com;
Mustapha(_dot_)aissaoui(_at_)Alcatel-lucent(_dot_)com;
david(_dot_)i(_dot_)allan(_at_)ericsson(_dot_)com;
busschbach(_at_)alcatel-lucent(_dot_)com
Cc: stbryant(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com; adrian(_dot_)farrel(_at_)huawei(_dot_)com;
pwe3(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; andrew(_dot_)g(_dot_)malis(_at_)verizon(_dot_)com;
matthew(_dot_)bocci(_at_)alcatel-lucent(_dot_)com;
ipr-announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Posting of IPR Disclosure related to Cisco's Statement of IPR relating
to draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-12
Dear Monique Morrow, Yaakov Stein, Luca Martini, Thomas Nadeau, Mustapha
Aissaoui, David Allan, Peter Busschbach:
An IPR disclosure that pertains to your Internet-Draft entitled "Pseudowire
(PW) OAM Message Mapping" (draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map) was submitted to the
IETF Secretariat on 2010-04-07 and has been posted on the "IETF Page of
Intellectual Property Rights Disclosures"
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1311/). The title of the IPR disclosure is
"Cisco's Statement of IPR relating to draft-ietf-pwe3-oam-msg-map-12."
The IETF Secretariat
_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf