At 13:19 28-04-10, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I did not notice the date.
As your concern seems to be about the disclosure and not the validity
of the patent, you could overlook the date.
More worrisome, I cannot read the reference. The link goes to a page
FYI 36 mentions ISO/IEC 7812-1:1993.
I note that this second Last Call is because the writeup failed to
highlight a normative down reference to an Experimental RFC. One of
the questions asked before a Last Call was:
"Has an IPR disclosure related to this document been filed? If so,
please include a reference to the disclosure and summarize the WG
discussion and conclusion on this issue."
The answer to that was:
"There are no concerns with this document. No IPR disclosures have
been field."
Given that a patent is explicitly referenced in
draft-ietf-keyprov-symmetrickeyformat, there should have been a note
about that. There shouldn't have been a reference to the patent in
the I-D. One of the authors mentioned that it is a bad reference and
it will be changed.
On a tangent, authors (I am not referring to any author associated
with this draft) should be aware that they are claiming that their
"Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79". Saying that there is an open
source implementation or that other SDO didn't see any issue is not a
disclosure.
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf