Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Paul Vixie
> Warren Kumari > Saturday, October 25, 2014 2:10 PM > > > On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Paul Vixie > wrote: > > > >> Paul Hoffman >> Saturday, October 25, 2014 11:06 AM >> >> 1) It is a patent appl

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Warren Kumari
On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: > > > Paul Hoffman > Saturday, October 25, 2014 11:06 AM > > 1) It is a patent application, not a patent. > 2) The application was filed by Verisign, not Google. > > --Paul Hoffman > > > thanks. however, i was told google also has one on Q-M.

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Paul Vixie
> Paul Hoffman > Saturday, October 25, 2014 11:06 AM > > 1) It is a patent application, not a patent. > 2) The application was filed by Verisign, not Google. > > --Paul Hoffman thanks. however, i was told google also has one on Q-M. that's the one i thought this th

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Paul Hoffman
On Oct 25, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Paul Vixie wrote: >> http://www.google.com/patents/EP266A1?cl=en >> > > importantly, google's policy is to use patents only in defense. i've > requested that they make that explicit in the case of this particula

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Phillip Hallam-Baker
Paul, It is a VeriSign patent, its just being shown on the Google patent serach engine On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Paul Vixie wrote: > > > Stephane Bortzmeyer > Saturday, October 25, 2014 2:24 AM > [Copy to dnsop since the qname minimisation draft is now a WG item at > dnsop.] > > On T

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Paul Vixie
> Stephane Bortzmeyer > Saturday, October 25, 2014 2:24 AM > [Copy to dnsop since the qname minimisation draft is now a WG item at > dnsop.] > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:21:57AM -0700, > David Conrad wrote > > http://www.google.com/patents/EP266A1?cl=en importan

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Rubens Kuhl
> On Oct 25, 2014, at 2:03 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker > wrote: > > The claims are broad, not specific to one field of use. > > But there isn't a patent yet and they may have been waiting to file after > grant. > > It is possible for someone other than the IPR holder to file but best if its >

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Phillip Hallam-Baker
The claims are broad, not specific to one field of use. But there isn't a patent yet and they may have been waiting to file after grant. It is possible for someone other than the IPR holder to file but best if its the IPR holder. The mere existence of a patent does not necessarily mean an intent

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Stephen Farrell
On 25/10/14 15:56, Ted Lemon wrote: > And also if anyone from Verisign is participating, they are required to > disclose, Well, only if they think that the IPR is relevant. Their claims (I've not read 'em) could after all be unrelated to the draft, e.g. if they've only claimed some madly compli

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Ted Lemon
On Oct 25, 2014, at 5:24 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > Back to IETF issues: can someone who have read RFC 3979 more > thoroughly than me tell me if, as the draft author, I'm supposed to > file the IPR disclosure or is it up to Verisign employees? You should, not must, file a third-party disclo

Re: [DNSOP] [dns-privacy] Qname minimization IPR

2014-10-25 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
[Copy to dnsop since the qname minimisation draft is now a WG item at dnsop.] On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:21:57AM -0700, David Conrad wrote a message of 56 lines which said: > http://www.google.com/patents/EP266A1?cl=en Well, some resolvers (the programs which will have to implement qname