On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 10:13 PM, bert hubert <bert.hub...@netherlabs.nl> wrote: Bert Huber wrote: > Also, should we work with companies attempting to hinder progress by > clinging to patents which are no longer enforceable?
Hm. First, I tend to agree with you that the IETF should not work with companies that attempt to hinder progress by asserting patents. I am disappointed, however, that you would suggest that Nominum is such a company. We've been active in the IETF since the company was founded, and have produced many standards during that time. As far as I know Nominum has never made any obstructive claims about patents in connection with our participation in the IETF. As a Nominum employee, I became aware of this issue about a week ago, and at that time our legal team was asked to submit an IPR notification on this draft with terms of use. I do not know what the exact language will be, so don't take this as that text, but our CTO and CEO have both said that our position should be something to the effect that if there's a standard developed in the IETF that would be covered by the patent, we would not assert these rights. We think the performance and security of the DNS are important. That’s one of the reasons that we implemented measures like this years ago. We’re supportive of it becoming more recognized in the standards community at this point. We also appreciate Andreas Gustafsson's good work at Nominum in developing this technology. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
